Posted here and the Musk thread. Both liars; willful and knowingly sabotaging democracy, the United States, and much of the world.
NASA media conference again confirms that Trump and Musk statements about the Starliner astronauts, were false.
Neither spoke to NASA or the Biden administration, as they claimed. All garbage, all the time, intended for the stupid.
Also said it was the batteries on the new Crew Dragon capsule that failed certification, and delayed the Crew 10 mission.
Additionally the swapped Crew Dragon capsule still has open issues, because it was not originally prepped for a NASA mission. Some steps were skipped that NASA requires.
Application of the heat shield tiles was not done under NASA supervision and inspection. And the capsule thrusters did not have protective coatings reapplied before installation.
Additionally the loss of a Falcon booster a few days ago was due to a piping leak on ascent that sprayed fuel onto hot engine parts. So NASA wants to see the mishap investigation on that before certifying the Crew 10 launch.
NASA is reviewing SpaceX documentation to clarify if the work meets NASA standards. They are still hoping to launch on March 12.
Sharing a Facebook post by Carrick Ryan, a former Federal Agent.
Lost in the noise of the past two weeks, not many people noticed that Trump took some unprecedented steps to nullify the one branch of Government he doesn’t completely control - the judiciary.
Firstly, he fired any Justice Department prosecutors who participated in investigations against him, and removed the security clearances of any former intelligence officials who have criticised him publicly, including former President Biden.
He signed an executive order removing the security clearances and banning from federal buildings for any lawyer that was found to have assisted in impeachment investigations against him. Even those acting pro-bono.
He signed an executive order banning not-for profit workers from a federal loan forgiveness scheme if they were deemed to have engaged in “improper” activities. This would likely include any not-for profits that challenge his policies in court.
He then signed an executive order requiring any plaintiff wishing to challenge the legality of Trump’s actions in court to provide, up front, a bond covering the totality of the Government’s legal costs, to be forfeited in full if the case fails.
These are all clearly designed to deter anyone from using the courts to restrain him, and they will work.
Almost no one will have the money available to provide the necessary bond to even get their day in court, and even if they did… how many lawyers would want to take that job?
It should be noted that this is exactly how Putin took control of Russia. Make resistance too costly. Intimidate the public into apathy.
I know some EO’s have been stayed at the first (district?) level yet if this EO applies to them they either ignore the bond or make it $1. I reckon that’s the first of this lot of EO’s that has to be challenged and stayed/stricken.
Doest SCOTUS absolutely have to wait for extra-legal EO’s to reach them to do anything? How many millions of dollars is their legal costs?
I don’t know how much cash the ACLU has for bonds, or any lawyers who didn’t challenge trump in some way for his insurrection.
Would congress really vote on party lines on any laws undoing the EO’s that are really egregious? I saw most of them the other night - are they on vacation otherwise?
Why do executive orders require judicial review? They should be ignored. If the Trump administration doesn’t like it, the burden is on them to enforce their decrees.
Anything can be subject to legal action. If the President issues an order that is clearly problematic, a party with standing can request an injunction and a judge can impose it. SCotUS will probably get involved because the injunction will almost certainly be appealed.
SCotUS ruled that the President can do whatsoever he wants, without repercussions, but they did not rule that he must be allowed to do whatsoever he wants.
This is regarding the executive order requiring a bond to sue the Trump administration. If a plaintiff ignores the executive order, and a court agrees to hear their lawsuit without a bond, what can Trump do?
I don’t think they said anything that approaches this. Their stated rationales for giving Trump immunity for (practically speaking) anything he does were along the lines of ‘a President cannot be effective if that President fears legal action may be taken against him.’ They were, ostensibly, concerned with freeing a President (or a Republican one, anyway) to make the Big Decisions without anxiety about being tried, convicted, and imprisoned for having made a Big Decision.
I don’t think they said anything like ‘a President cannot be crossed or contradicted or otherwise thwarted from doing whatever he wishes to do.’
But perhaps someone more versed in interpreting SCOTUS will come along and provide a more definitive answer.
Practically speaking, you’ve got it. They did not state he has unquestionable immunity from prosecution.
In theory, they stated the President should have wide latitude in taking official actions without fear of legal repercussions.
The rub is that they have reserved for the courts the right to ultimately decide what
is or is not an ‘official’ Presidential act and covered under such immunity as opposed to non-official acts he’s has undertaken as a private individual.
Given the (lack of) speed with which the courts act vs how fast an executive branch can act combined with some bad actors in the judiciary itself, it is clear to most people what this means in practice. We’re seeing it play out in real time, after all.
ICE has detained Palestinian activist Mahmoud Khalil, because, reasons. When questioned, ICE responded that they had “revoked” his student visa and green card.
This is beyond troubling. The administration is inching closer and closer to declaring that they can disappear anyone, anywhere, at any time, for, reasons. Alexandria is decrying this action, exhorting civil rights activists to protest this action.
Being paranoid, I am hesitant to advocate protesting, because once you are out there, “they” will have a bead on you, for the disappearing. I want to strenouously object to this maniac’s bullshit, but I am not quite ready to paint a target on my shirt.