r/politics • u/Quirkie The Netherlands • 15d ago

Possible Paywall Jack Smith Found Proof Beyond “Reasonable Doubt” of Trump’s Guilt

https://newrepublic.com/post/215971/jack-smith-proof-beyond-reasonable-doubt-donald-trump-guilt
29.1k Upvotes

98% Upvoted

927 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

60

u/AcolyteOfInfinity 15d ago

Removal of current judges would be a better option. We can’t keep going through this pack the court cycle when the problem still persists. The more fingers you have in the pie, the messier it’ll get in the future

41

u/da2Pakaveli 15d ago

You need 67 votes in the senate to get rid of them. Number of justices isn't set in the constitution so it should be possible with 51 votes (and by getting rid of the filibuster) afaik

38

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 15d ago

[deleted]

2

u/pokemansplainer 15d ago

This is exactly what the republicans would do

2

u/GoAgainKid 15d ago

Would try and do. They'd fuck it up.

-17

u/DUNG_INSPECTOR Ohio 15d ago

You sound like you're just as much of a threat to our democracy as the average Trump supporter.

14

u/[deleted] 15d ago edited 15d ago

[deleted]

-2

u/Pyorrhea 15d ago

What law, exactly, do you think has been broken?

5

u/What_a_fat_one 15d ago

You think enforcing the law is a threat to democracy?

1

u/DUNG_INSPECTOR Ohio 14d ago

I think calling for people to simply be arrested without any charges being brough, as the person I replied to suggested, is, in fact, a threat to democracy.

If you support simply arresting your political opponents without any charges being brought, then yeah, you're a threat to democracy.

1

u/What_a_fat_one 14d ago

simply be arrested without any charges being brough,

That's how 99% of people are arrested. And with these people if you bring charges first there is a very real flight concern.

4

u/Robotic_Systematic 15d ago

Was Abraham Lincoln a threat to democracy when he considered arresting Chief Justice Taney?

8

u/AcolyteOfInfinity 15d ago

50% of house and 67% of senate, don’t believe the filibuster changes that but could be wrong

5

u/da2Pakaveli 15d ago

We say we set the number of justices to 13. Since that doesn't "override" anything in the Constitution we can pass it with simple majorities.

And to avoid Republicans filibustering it...we get rid of the filibuster.

Maybe we can pull some Orban type bs and introduce some dumb reason we can get rid of them (like in Poland they put age limits).

8

u/AcolyteOfInfinity 15d ago

Using Orbán as an example of how we should conduct our government is bat shit crazy

5

u/Carlyz37 Illinois 15d ago

Well our government is currently being conducted in similar ways as Orban so...

1

u/theVoidWatches Pennsylvania 15d ago

And that's a bad thing.

4

u/Mobile_Morale 15d ago

Well sitting around a campfire singing kumbaya isn't going to fix shit.

0

u/AcolyteOfInfinity 15d ago

Yeah cause siding with even more autocracy solves it. Numbnuts

2

u/Mobile_Morale 15d ago

Nobody is siding with him. They're talking about using his corrupt power grab method to take the country back from the Republicans.

The guy doesn't matter. They could've used any corrupt athoritarian government as an example.

2

u/theVoidWatches Pennsylvania 15d ago

Don't worry, no one has ever used authoritarian techniques to defeat authoritarians and then ended up as just another authoritarian before! /s

2

u/da2Pakaveli 15d ago

The new Hungarian PM has done some of that stuff as well to weed out left over Fidesz corruption. It's unfortunately necessary.

1

u/o8Stu 15d ago

The Constitution spells out that they'll remain Justices "in good conduct", meaning that they can't be removed by any means other than impeachment.

Biden's plan for the court tries to sidestep this by allowing them to remain justices of lower federal courts after their 18-year tenure was up (if they want to stay on), but that obviously wasn't passed into law and so hasn't been tested for legality / constitutionality. Would be rather weird to see the supreme court decide whether it's Constitutional to put supreme court justices out to pasture after 18 years, especially considering that several of those currently sitting would be subject to that limit.

0

u/BlgMastic 15d ago

So Trump can appoint 4 justices tomorrow with that logic?

3

u/BCR12 14d ago

If you want to impeach them, yeah. I'm sure a couple of them have committed enough crimes to just be arrested and charged with taking bribes and corruption. Afterwards appoint some new recess appointment justices temporarily. Then the arrested justices can their case all the way to the new supreme court with a new ruling on what bribery is, not whatever the last ruling they made was where you basically have to say this is bribery for it to be bribery.

1

u/BitTwiddles 15d ago

Having the justices appointed by a political President is the start of the problem. The office of President is unnecessary today and actually detrimental to national stability and security.