The Supremes

[UpperWestside 6180]

7 hours ago, SubliminalHorn said:

We’ve decided we’re not going to do anything “patriotic”. This country doesn’t deserve a celebration 

I stopped celebrating a few years back. It’s just another day. 

[tx 3 putt 77258]

I'm curious how much thomas has really been paid, because he's on one man war against osha

lot of donors are easily lined up to bring osha down 

[C-Man 27239]

9 hours ago, Hookah Horns said:

This is going to be the most depressing July 4th of my life. Most depressing so far, I should say. 

Yeah, I have the same shitty attitude heading into this one as you. I plan to drink heavily.

[HenryJames 66138]

4 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

I'm curious how much thomas has really been paid, because he's on one man war against osha

lot of donors are easily lined up to bring osha down 

OSHA? They’re coming after the fucking 20th century.

[Goofyboy 3293]

OSHA? They’re coming after the fucking 20th century.

Yep - think Industrial Revolution safety record or The Jungle by Sinclair. No more medium rare steaks or processed meat for me.

[DDD Dad 14346]

5 hours ago, C-Man said:

Yeah, I have the same shitty attitude heading into this one as you. I plan to drink heavily.

 

[BamaATL 16593]

6 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

I'm curious how much thomas has really been paid, because he's on one man war against osha

lot of donors are easily lined up to bring osha down 

It's amazing to see how many companies willfully ignore OSHA as it is.  At least prior to last week, OSHA had significant enforcement and penalties it could use, pretty much entirely after the fact of a major injury/incident.  

[CooterBrown 18021]

7 hours ago, tx 3 putt said:

I'm curious how much thomas has really been paid, because he's on one man war against osha

lot of donors are easily lined up to bring osha down 

There was an article the other day that stated Thomas has received over $4M.

 

[miguelito 11266]

That we know of.

[troph 24899]

If ever there was a basis for judicial impeachment? It’s there for a reason. 

[SubliminalHorn 6809]

8 minutes ago, troph said:

If ever there was a basis for judicial impeachment? It’s there for a reason. 

*laughs in republican*

[Biff Tannen 45696]

So I'll be around the in laws for a few days this 4th of July and I'm going to try and avoid politics, but if SCOTUS comes up, I'm simply going to ask if they would be ok with Biden drone striking Mar-a-Lago and taking out Trump?  Because it would be an official act right?

[WhatTheBuck 28794]

46 minutes ago, CooterBrown said:

There was an article the other day that stated Thomas has received over $4M.

And he’s a guy who once complained about how Supreme Court justices get paid so little, maybe he should leave for a job in the private sector. 

[CooterBrown 18021]

19 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

And he’s a guy who once complained about how Supreme Court justices get paid so little, maybe he should leave for a job in the private sector. 

I guess, technically, he does have a second job in the private sector.

[Nivek 16949]

Assuming Barrett doesn’t change her mind in the post sod contention she expresses with the majority, that “stuff” wouldn’t play going forward, right?

She will be one of the four replaced.

[Js1 85457]

2 minutes ago, Nivek said:

She will be one of the four replaced.

She did her job by giving woman coverage to Dobbs. Bye bye now 

[Nivek 16949]

And he’s a guy who once complained about how Supreme Court justices get paid so little, maybe he should leave for a job in the private sector. 

Haha, they wouldn’t pay him shit in the private sector. His only value is a decision for sale.

[Dutchrudder 11150]

23 minutes ago, Nivek said:

Haha, they wouldn’t pay him shit in the private sector. His only value is a decision for sale.

He could make a lot of money with "speaking engagements" that may or may not actually happen. Probably already does that anyways. 

[Nivek 16949]

1 hour ago, Dutchrudder said:

He could make a lot of money with "speaking engagements" that may or may not actually happen. Probably already does that anyways. 

Those are the after the service "tip" money.

[Michael Knight 12989]

23 hours ago, troph said:

islands aren't safe (hurricanes). Southern Europe is burning hot these days. and fascism is on the rise everywhere. Right now I think Portugal, Costa Rica (maybe even in the mountains), shit where else? Northern Europe maybe. South Pacific is hotAF.

Hell England might vote in Labour looks like they went thru their insane period early and are recovering

[Brisketexan 105188]

18 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Hell England might vote in Labour looks like they went thru their insane period early and are recovering

They have the benefit of a multi-party system.  The MAGA nuts there vote Reform.  The Tories stayed pretty much Tory (country club Republican).   In our two party system, the Country Club Republican party just handed the reins over to our version of Reform, and went all-in on right wing moonbattery.

The UK is still a shitshow.  And we don't even have a hope of performing as well as they are.

[Js1 85457]

25 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

Hell England might vote in Labour looks like they went thru their insane period early and are recovering

The Tories have been in power for 14 consecutive years before they are getting shellacked tomorrow.  So I guess you're saying we have to go through 3+ consecutive terms of MAGA?

[Michael Knight 12989]

27 minutes ago, Js1 said:

The Tories have been in power for 14 consecutive years before they are getting shellacked tomorrow.  So I guess you're saying we have to go through 3+ consecutive terms of MAGA?

I was suggesting we could all move to England

[troph 24899]

@Js1 what's y'alls current thinking?  We are trying to stay in Texas for at least 4 more years. Then we have options. We hope the infection doesn't spread beyond red states, we are hoping the blue states will be allowed to have state and local laws that protect us, give us access to healthcare, abortion (don't need it), right to marry, etc. etc. I really don't think a full 50 state infection is likely. I don't think the feds are going to tell adults what they can and can't do and even before Obergefell states were recognizing same sex marriages, etc. So my thinking is the worst case scenerio from a legal perspective is that.  Live in a blue state, you're ok.

I'm not so sure the infection goes to all 50 states through a heavy federal government legislative approach. I can't see SCOTUS saying the constitution prohibits same sex marriage etc. I can't see SCOTUS saying trans people have no right to be alive. BUT I do see SCOTUS saying LGBTQ folk have no protected rights, again, back to a blue state should be ok. 

I guess the risk is federal legislation outlawing LGBTQ existence - marriage not allowed, healthcare not allowed, etc. etc.  I think the watch point here is POTUS + House of Reps + Senate turns red, GTFO potentially. I see this as relatively remote though.

What's your take?

and if federal legislation forcing red state ideology on blue states happen, what countries are you looking at?

None of this takes into account the likely violence that will increase, but then living in a blue state in the right part of that state could inoculate us from that violence. Sucks but going back into the public closet by not showing your spouse affection in public or being careful how you refer to them would suuuuuuck.

Edited July 3 by troph

[Js1 85457]

Oh I'm out of Texas in March 2025.  Already got all the approvals to go back to Denver for work.  Dragging some friends along too. 

If we have to GTFO the states, Mexico City looks pretty good. 

[troph 24899]

Just now, Js1 said:

Oh I'm out of Texas in March 2025.  Already got all the approvals to go back to Denver for work.  Dragging some friends along too. 

If we have to GTFO the states, Mexico City looks pretty good. 

what do you think is the chance of having to vacate the country? I actually see it as pretty unlikely?  yes, CO is our bug out state when the kids are done with HS. I'll get residency in CO before then if I absolutely have to.

[Js1 85457]

Just now, troph said:

what do you think is the chance of having to vacate the country? I actually see it as pretty unlikely?  yes, CO is our bug out state when the kids are done with HS. I'll get residency in CO before then if I absolutely have to.

I have no idea, tbh.  Will probably depend if America just goes full MAGA and gives Trump both houses or if there's some sort of sanity and a WH/Congress split. 

6 minutes ago, Michael Knight said:

I was suggesting we could all move to England

Isn't it extremely difficult to immigrate to the UK? 

[troph 24899]

Just now, Js1 said:

I have no idea, tbh.  Will probably depend if America just goes full MAGA and gives Trump both houses or if there's some sort of sanity and a WH/Congress split. 

ok we see it the same.  I think the risk are:

1. Red states are gone, huge risks.

2. Blue states are probably ok (SCOTUS can't outlaw us), but sweep of Congress/WH by MAGA makes it a risk at that time.

3. Violence anywhere is a risk (everything from Pulse style to civil war style (maga vs. others, not people vs. government).

[Mo Horn 8853]

Valencia, Spain by 2026 for us

[Js1 85457]

5 minutes ago, troph said:

what do you think is the chance of having to vacate the country? I actually see it as pretty unlikely?  yes, CO is our bug out state when the kids are done with HS. I'll get residency in CO before then if I absolutely have to.

See you in CO then.  First round on me. 

[Keef 775]

9 minutes ago, Js1 said:

Isn't it extremely difficult to immigrate to the UK? 

Extremely, extremely difficult.  My sister married a Brit and they've spent three years trying to figure out how to get her residency and work permit over there.  I think if you go for an MBA or an advanced degree over there starting next year, you can't even bring your spouse.

[troph 24899]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

See you in CO then.  First round on me. 

deal, though you might have to come to the mountains, we wouldn't be in Denver.

[Js1 85457]

3 minutes ago, troph said:

deal, though you might have to come to the mountains, we wouldn't be in Denver.

Any reason to go to the mountains is fine. 

[HenryJames 66138]

Why don't you get a horse and live in the mountains some place and don't bother anybody?

['stache 21825]

My Mexican ancestors were all on this side of the Rio going back I think 4 generations. One of my grandmothers was born in Mexico but crossed when she was 3 years old and was documented as a US Citizen. I really wish there was a way to get Mexican citizenship just in case. My brother in laws mother was born in Mexico and he obtained dual citizenship several years ago. I’m pretty fucking jealous. My only escape plan is to move closer to my wife’s extended family in Connecticut, I’d like to be physically present there when the republic collapses and Texoma becomes a full independent theocracy.

[Surly Bevo 25098]

Illegal immigration from the US to Mexico will be some irony

[atomheartbevo 89766]

7 hours ago, Goofyboy said:

Yep - think Industrial Revolution safety record or The Jungle by Sinclair. No more medium rare steaks or processed meat for me.

MAGA: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire?  Hold my beer!

[Chad Fuck 17711]

MAGA: Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire?  Hold my beer!

It’s really crazy that so many of our regulations are written in blood, but the people who scream “too many regulations!” never understand that undoing them may spill their own blood.

Leopard, meet face example eleventy billion.

[tx 3 putt 77258]

6 hours ago, CooterBrown said:

There was an article the other day that stated Thomas has received over $4M.

 

‘reported’ 

 

Project 2025 also wants to add 4 justices if Trump wins 

[Brisketexan 105188]

1 hour ago, troph said:

I can't see SCOTUS saying the constitution prohibits same sex marriage etc. I can't see SCOTUS saying trans people have no right to be alive.

They already said that.  They said that the President can take any action that is colorable within his core constitutional powers.  One of those is as commander in chief of the military.

As he has determined that the homogays and trans and brown people and democrats are a grave threat to national security, poisoning the blood of our country, which constitutes open warfare against real Americans, he will order the military to round all of those people up and execute them if they resist/argue.

Criminal consequences: NONE.

Impeachment conviction risk: NONE, unless the dems control 60 votes in the Senate, which will not happen when he imprisons/kills/otherwise strips the right to vote from all democratic voters.

Just read the script.  The most recent one that fits was written in German, but I'm sure you can find a good translation somewhere.

[strangulation! 1716]

1 hour ago, Keef said:

Extremely, extremely difficult.  My sister married a Brit and they've spent three years trying to figure out how to get her residency and work permit over there.  I think if you go for an MBA or an advanced degree over there starting next year, you can't even bring your spouse.

med school in the UK it is!

[Chad Fuck 17711]

14 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

They already said that.  They said that the President can take any action that is colorable within his core constitutional powers.  One of those is as commander in chief of the military.

As he has determined that the homogays and trans and brown people and democrats are a grave threat to national security, poisoning the blood of our country, which constitutes open warfare against real Americans, he will order the military to round all of those people up and execute them if they resist/argue.

Criminal consequences: NONE.

Impeachment conviction risk: NONE, unless the dems control 60 votes in the Senate, which will not happen when he imprisons/kills/otherwise strips the right to vote from all democratic voters.

Just read the script.  The most recent one that fits was written in German, but I'm sure you can find a good translation somewhere.

There's one in Chinese, there's one In Korean, there's many in Spanish, there's one in Cambodian, there's one in Vietnamese, there's several in Arabic...need I go on?

[Brisketexan 105188]

3 minutes ago, Chad Fuck said:

There's one in Chinese, there's one In Korean, there's many in Spanish, there's one in Cambodian, there's one in Vietnamese, there's several in Arabic...need I go on?

Culturally, I think the German one is the best fit, but all contain recipes that can easily be adapted to our American taste for authoritarian brutality.  Bon appetit!

[troph 24899]

35 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

They already said that.  They said that the President can take any action that is colorable within his core constitutional powers.  One of those is as commander in chief of the military.

As he has determined that the homogays and trans and brown people and democrats are a grave threat to national security, poisoning the blood of our country, which constitutes open warfare against real Americans, he will order the military to round all of those people up and execute them if they resist/argue.

Criminal consequences: NONE.

Impeachment conviction risk: NONE, unless the dems control 60 votes in the Senate, which will not happen when he imprisons/kills/otherwise strips the right to vote from all democratic voters.

Just read the script.  The most recent one that fits was written in German, but I'm sure you can find a good translation somewhere.

I appreciate your response, but to be clear I'm trying not to evaluate through rhetoric but through systematic analysis to truly get to the risk profile here. This is my current risk assessment:

Control of Congress

immunity from criminal prosecution does not mean the act is lawful and cannot be stopped, it only means he can't be prosecuted.  I think for the worst case scenario, MAGA would have to have control of the WH and both houses of Congress and pass a law that says trans people should be eradicated. Then he is executing a law and there is no ability to stop it other than through a SCOTUS ruling which I would give a very low probability of receiving.  Next to civil violence, this to me is the risk to watch for, full MAGA control over the WH and Congress. If that happens, better have a go bag and be ready to flee the country.

Executive Orders - WWII-Style Camps?

Now I guess the MAGA POTUS could sign an executive order that trans people are a threat and should be exterminated and then we are all rounded up. Here I actually think immigrants and citizens of Hispanic descent are more at risk. I think Japanese camps during WWII are the example to be most concerned about and that was during a war and I think the only external war like threat MAGA POTUS can come up with is illegal immigration. So I think in that respect, trans people are "safer" than brown people. wow. I think there is some risk, but I do think being rounded up under an Executive Order is going to be very difficult for a MAGA POTUS to do.

SCOTUS - Outlaw Existence vs. Two State(s) Solution

I do think as strange as this sounds, the Dobbs decision provides a way out and shows that SCOTUS acknowledges we have a two state system - federal and states, allowing therefore blue and red states. And in that sense, fleeing to a blue state can provide tremendous protection.  I also think SCOTUS would be hard pressed to find any basis for the eradication of a group of people in the Constitution. What they will do is find that LGBTQ people have no protected rights under the Constitution, again leaving it up to the blue and red states to decide if they want to be a red state and go to heaven (ban LGBTQ people) or party in hell with the rest of us in the blue states (protect LGBTQ people). Basically, I don't see how SCOTUS finds federalism (state and federal power co-existing) unconstitutional.  That's what it would take to disallow blue states to protect others.

If your trying to triage this, and this sounds awful but it is what it is, Dobbs is a bad decision and the future is easy to see - guaranteed rights to contraception, interracial marriage, gay marriage, LGBTQ sex gone - but those decisions will require additional state action (red states) to effectuate the ban on queer folk.  Fleeing to a blue state avoids the harms of Dobbs. I FULLY acknowledge that's a shit sandwich for many, poor, stuck by circumstances, etc. and frankly for the next 4-5 years that's us. But if you're trying to manage the situation, not unlike a legal dispute, what keeps me up at night for my clients is no way out, no options, a difficult option is a solution and so here, I see a way out.

Civil Violence

I think the likelihood of a traditional civil war is nil. I think the federal government is too strong to allow for a sustained insurrection or for any succession. I do think there can and probably will be more skirmishes between militia types and the government. I also think citizen on citizen violence is already here and it will increase. I think MAGA violence against LGBTQ and POC (black Americans and people of Hispanic decent) is coming. And in that sense, I do believe there is a high likelihood of a non-traditional civil war where people die at the hands of their neighbors.

Conclusion

In the end, I think the most likely outcome is the two state(s) solution. I think executive orders and new federal laws designed to eradicate people groups within the citizenry is actually a low risk but it should be monitored closely. I do think people of Hispanic descent have a special risk if illegal immigration is deemed a war by a MAGA POTUS. I think there is a very strong likelihood that fleeing to a blue state will be strong protection against government intrusion but I do think that civil violence will be a risk in most states.

Edited July 3 by troph

[Biff Tannen 45696]

2 hours ago, Michael Knight said:

I was suggesting we could all move to England

I'm going to the Cotswolds in September.  Might just stay there, depending on circumstances then.

[ultimaton 2982]

The SCOTUS opinion rubber stamping the Trump regime's "anti grooming" LGBTQ internment camps will be written by associate justice Chaya Raichik and it won't stop at any red state/blue state borders. 

[troph 24899]

5 minutes ago, ultimaton said:

The SCOTUS opinion rubber stamping the Trump regime's "anti grooming" LGBTQ internment camps will be written by associate justice Chaya Raichik and it won't stop at any red state/blue state borders. 

that's the executive order or legislation route. I think the exec order is under 5% likelihood, I think the MAGA controlled WH / Congress legislative route is much, much higher and will come in the form of all sorts of regulations including but not limited to no right to health care, outlaw queer/gay sex, etc. basically returning to the olden times.  I do not think camps by legislation are likely, but jail time for having gay sex? possibly.

Edited July 3 by troph

[Brisketexan 105188]

32 minutes ago, troph said:

Now I guess the MAGA POTUS could sign an executive order that trans people are a threat and should be exterminated and then we are all rounded up. Here I actually think immigrants and citizens of Hispanic descent are more at risk. I think Japanese camps during WWII are the example to be most concerned about and that was during a war and I think the only external war like threat MAGA POTUS can come up with is illegal immigration. So I think in that respect, trans people are "safer" than brown people.

Oh, and 100% this.  Remember, last time around, they gave it a shot at challenging the citizenship of US citizens born in border hospitals before a certain date.  Falling into that group?  My dad.  If you think they're not looking to do a full "beaner purge," you haven't been paying attention.

On the bright side, there's a fair chance they'll go so over-the-top that I (and any other hispanic US citzen) will have a good political asylum claim in multiple countries, so I got that going for me, which is nice.

34 minutes ago, troph said:

I do think as strange as this sounds, the Dobbs decision provides a way out and shows that SCOTUS acknowledges we have a two state system - federal and states, allowing therefore blue and red states. And in that sense, fleeing to a blue state can provide tremendous protection. 

Unless and until you cross the border into a red state, and are arrested and indefinitely detained for "being an aberration and crime against nature."  Or any number of other Gilead-type laws they'll pass.  Bottom line, if you live in a blue state, traveling to a red state will be traveling to a land in which you have no rights and no expectation of any protection by the rule of law.  In the future, if you are a blue state resident who has any vulnerability, traveling to a red state will be as foolhardy a venture as traveling to Putin's Russia.  There will be a confederation of states in which the "lesser" (non-white, non-fundamentalist christian types) have minimal rights and legal protections, including any people foolish enough to visit from blue states, and the blue state confederation, which will look a lot like the US we remembered from say, 20 years ago, give or take a few things (gay marriage will be legal).  Travelers will have all expected rights and protections when in blue states; they will have next to none in red states.

Gilead is real.  They have told us so.  We should believe them.

[troph 24899]

24 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, and 100% this.  Remember, last time around, they gave it a shot at challenging the citizenship of US citizens born in border hospitals before a certain date.  Falling into that group?  My dad.  If you think they're not looking to do a full "beaner purge," you haven't been paying attention.

On the bright side, there's a fair chance they'll go so over-the-top that I (and any other hispanic US citzen) will have a good political asylum claim in multiple countries, so I got that going for me, which is nice.

Unless and until you cross the border into a red state, and are arrested and indefinitely detained for "being an aberration and crime against nature."  Or any number of other Gilead-type laws they'll pass.  Bottom line, if you live in a blue state, traveling to a red state will be traveling to a land in which you have no rights and no expectation of any protection by the rule of law.  In the future, if you are a blue state resident who has any vulnerability, traveling to a red state will be as foolhardy a venture as traveling to Putin's Russia.  There will be a confederation of states in which the "lesser" (non-white, non-fundamentalist christian types) have minimal rights and legal protections, including any people foolish enough to visit from blue states, and the blue state confederation, which will look a lot like the US we remembered from say, 20 years ago, give or take a few things (gay marriage will be legal).  Travelers will have all expected rights and protections when in blue states; they will have next to none in red states.

Gilead is real.  They have told us so.  We should believe them.

we are probably seeing it fairly similarly when you put your analytical hat on and take off your rhetoric hat. I think white queer folk are less at risk of being rounded up than brown folk, because if history is any teacher, the external threat is what has led US presidents to take such awful action. Illegal immigration is the justification.

We already limit our travel to other red states. The Keys would be my ideal US vacation getaway along with the mountain states. We haven't been to Florida in years and I'm deeply conflicted about it. As of right now, we are working from Colorado for a month. We have a trip planed to Oregon and Washington for Thanksgiving, but traveling to a red state? yeah, nah. If we leave Texas because of red politics, we will not return to a red state for any reason, except to bury my mom.

Edited July 3 by troph

[The Original Greaser Bob 2843]

42 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

I'm going to the Cotswolds in September.

By careful.  I think Sir Cecil Cotswolds is a pedo.