Atom

I can't tell if you're summarizing here, but that's exactly what he's doing. The speaker and majority leader decide what bills are allowed to be brought to the floor for a vote. The only way around that is a discharge petition. Jefferies can't bring the bill to a vote himself. From the article:

"The legislation could also be brought to the floor via a discharge petition, which would require the support of 218 members, including at least four Republicans."

The question is, will 4 Republicans break with Trump to support it?

TIL what the Rule of Four was. Thank you for sharing that!

You're absolutely right. It's highly unlikely they'd rule in his favor. As you said, that would give any president absolute power and that's not agreeable to the court who, after overturning Chevron, will wield a lot more power themselves.

I hope they refuse the case. It would have been smart for the judiciary as a whole to do that a long time ago. Let trump face trial while they still had another viable candidate in the race. However, the strategy in all of his legal fights has been to drag this out as long as possible in the hope that he becomes president and it's all null and void. Thus allowing him to never face trial and the court to never rule either way.

His supporters pay them very well. They get bait and switched into donating to his PACs to instead of his campaign directly and those PACs pay the legal bills.

"As Trump's legal battles ramped up in the second half of last year, so did his legal spending -- with his political action committees reporting a total of $34 million in legal expenditures in the second half of last year compared to roughly $26 million in the first half, according to the disclosures.

Trump's leadership PAC, Save America, continued to foot much of Trump's legal bills in the second half of last year, spending nearly $26 million on legal fees and other related expenses, while only raising $6 million."

https://abcnews.go.com/US/trump-spent-50m-pac-super-pac-money-legal/story?id=106843612

I doubt they will rule in his favor, or at least hope that is the case. The more likely scenario is that they'll play for time. They refused to take the case early a few months ago so that it would be forced into a lower court. That court took it's time and is now complete with the obvious ruling. Now the SCOTUS will take it up and sit on it till November.

How? Hawaii has a state constitution backing their decision. What can the EPA do? Say they Regulate climate emissions and ban oil extraction tomorrow. What happens? Texas and the other red oil producing states just fall in line? They say "gosh, I guess they can tell us what to do even though my boys on the cout said they can't, oh well, we lose"

Of course not. Blue states tend to not need to be told what to do and are often the ones making the standards that are later imposed by the EPA nationally (see CARB standards still regulating MPG for example). So the EPA will be telling red states what to do, with no authority to do so and you seriously think they will just...do it? In what universe do you live, because I'd sure like to be there.

Comon, don't you remember? We sure taught them a lesson in 2016 by abstaining from the vote. America is paradise now that we showed our collective non-voting might! /S

The EPA was stripped of its power to regulate carbon emissions in 2022. Congress would need to pass another Clean Air Act for them to do anything. Even then with the Chevron precedent about to be overturned in the coming weeks, the EPA will have the authority to do...not a god damned thing.

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1103595898/supreme-court-epa-climate-change

Red dead redemption 2 was delayed a year and GTA 5 was delayed 6 months. My optimistic guess was a fall 2025 release, but I honestly would be surprised to see it pushed into spring of 2026. I'll take delays for quality and reducing crunch culture either way.

Well, not Trump, but his donors. His legal fees are paid through his multiple Political Action Commities.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/news/trump-political-action-committees-2023-legal-bills/

"Save America PAC and Make America Great Again PAC, the two political action committees that are paying for Trump's legal defenses as he faces 91 felony counts across four cases, spent over $49.6 million of donor money on attorneys, legal consulting and investigation-related fees, according to his latest campaign finance filings. In the last six months of 2023 alone, the PACs spent over $28 million, compared to over $21.5 million spent in the first half of last year."

Did you know there is an actual fast travel option in that game? You access it from the map in your camp.

https://www.ign.com/wikis/red-dead-redemption-2/How_to_Fast_Travel

I like the mention of carriage rides too, or the taxis in GTA. Those are pretty immersive. You paid the driver and took a nap.

I didn't learn that Red Dead Redemption 2 had a fast travel system until after my first playthrough. I completed a second playthrough shortly after and still didn't use it. Im glad the game had the feature still because I know not everyone has 5-10 minutes to ride everywhere or are not as interested in that aspect of the game. The world was plenty compelling for me, personally, to not use it. I liberally use fast travel in other games. Sometimes I want immersion, sometimes I want to progress the story. I don't think it's indictive of lazy design. I really appreciate the option when I have it.