117
Trump’s policies are endangering the economy; it might cost Republicans in the 2026 midterms.
(goodauthority.org)
this post was submitted on 18 Mar 2025
117 points (99.2% liked)
politics
22004 readers
4307 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Chuck Schumer had that power last week. Look how well that turned out. That's what you're basing your hopes on?
Actually, no. Democrats have no subpoena power or ability to hold official hearings while in the minority.
I wouldn't exactly use Steve Bannon as a prime example. It took years for him to see any consequence at all, and he got a bare minimum. He got, what, 4 months? For the amount of money Bannon is making off of riding Trump's dick, I'd sit in a jail cell for 4 months too.
And I'll counter your argument with Jim Jordan. Ignored subpoenas. Didn't even get so much as a censure in the house for ignoring their own subpoena, let alone any form of punishment at all. If you for half a second think a Republican-led House is going to charge a prominent, full-throated MAGA member and chair of the Judiciary Committee with contempt, order his arrest, and have him jailed for non-compliance, I have beachfront property on Mars you may be interested in.
Your rationale goes on the premise that traditional norms and laws still apply. They do not. When the people who are in charge of enforcing those laws and norms are actively telling you that they're not going to enforce them, those laws aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
And the senate would not need to be involved here. All but 1 house dems did vote against it when there was a real chance to stop it (it wasn't 100% certain that republicans had the vors in the house)
House dems are livid at Schumer. The house has been better at opposing - it's just that their powers are much more limited while in the minority are more limited compared to the senate.
The context was in flipping the house. They would be in the majority in that scenario
Again the context was flipping the house
even pelosi was angry at shchumer and thats saying something.
Ok and assumming they flip the house what are they going to do? They can do all the hearings and pass out a metric fuckton of subpoenas, what makes you think anyone in this administration listens or shows up? I am pretty sure they did that the first time around, and people shook their fingers and sent very mean letters to no avail.
Whose to say Ttump then doesnt just dismiss congress? Whose gonna fucking stop him?
The Sergeant at Arms is part of the house, not the executive
If Trump tries to illegally dismissing congress, they could just still meet and direct the Sergeant at Arms anyway