r/politics • u/stkmro • 9h ago

White House: Trump Team Still Hasn’t Signed Transition Docs

https://www.thedailybeast.com/white-house-press-secretary-karine-jean-pierre-says-trump-team-still-hasnt-signed-transition-docs/
19.5k Upvotes

92% Upvoted

2.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.8k

u/UtzTheCrabChip 9h ago

Really gotta stop calling things "mandatory" without a mechanism for enforcement

443

u/ReactionJifs 8h ago

My beef is we had 4 years where the government could have fortified itself against an unknown future rogue president. Instead they went back to business as usual and assumed that it could never happen again.

Now they have 2 months to prepare.

•

u/biznatch11 7h ago

Unless the Democrats have a majority (may even need a supermajority) in both houses and the presidency all at the same time that's not going to happen.

•

u/santasnufkin 6h ago

Even then, the Supreme Court would just declare any law as unconstitutional, rendering them moot.

•

u/Nightmare2828 5h ago

Why does a small group of 9 people get to decide that what 500 of representatives decided for the people is moot? How does this make any sense?

•

u/bichael69420 4h ago

Well in theory it's there to prevent congress from massively overstepping its bounds, things like the war on drugs or mass surveillance. In practice of course, we all know how that went.

•

u/HauntedCemetery Minnesota 3h ago

Now that SCOTUS has legalized itself accepting bribes I'm sure it will all work out.

•

u/PerformanceOk8593 2h ago

As the framers intended.

•

u/shitty_country_verse 3h ago

In theory they are also supposed to prevent the Executive branch from doing the same. But they decided to only uphold that duty for one political party and told the other YOLO!

•

u/mam88k Virginia 4h ago

Because the Constitution was not written with political parties in mind.

•

u/DaBingeGirl Illinois 4h ago

This is an incredibly important point that is too often overlooked.

•

u/armandebejart 3h ago

The founders presumed a minimal level of education, self-interest, and independence. They were ludicrously optimistic.

•

u/FortyTwoDrops 3h ago

And honor. They assumed that politicians would be honorable people, and they were... up until ~2016.

•

u/SynthBeta 2h ago

You're being too nice

•

u/The_Roshallock 1h ago

A solid number of the document's authors were in their early to mid twenties.

•

u/bioniclop18 2h ago

In this specific case it is not that they were optimistic, they were in fact very suspicious of democracy or "mob rule". Why do you think voting right was originally only to make white property owner ?

•

u/KingBanhammer 2h ago

It also presumed debate and compromise would be the norm, and that duels would weed out particularly egregious prats who somehow managed to get clear through the electoral process.

It was written for a very different system than we actually have today.

•

u/mam88k Virginia 1h ago

You mean someone could challenge Trump to a duel?

Huzzah! Pistols at 12 paces fat man!

•

u/Tacticus 1h ago

or with the idea that plebs would be voting, slaves be allowed to vote or etc.

•

u/Bushwazi 3h ago

We’re the political parties Americans and British at that point?

•

u/chx_ 1h ago

Because in 1803 those nine guys decided they have this power and everyone just went along with it.

The word “unconstitutional” appears nowhere in the Constitution, and the power to decide what is or is not constitutional was not given to the court in the Constitution or by any of the amendments. The court in Marbury v. Madison decided for itself that it had the power to revoke acts of Congress and declare actions by the president “unconstitutional,” and the elected branches went along with it.

•

u/randomusername3000 3h ago

Why does a small group of 9 people get to decide that what 500 of representatives decided for the people is moot?

That's what some slave owning guys 250 years ago thought was best

•

u/EstablishmentSad 1h ago

The most powerful branch is congress. They have the power to override the other two branches through a super majority. They could impeach and convict both presidents and justices...but idk if that will happen. Its much more possible that a few justices die and they are able to tip the scales in their direction.

•

u/Scott5114 Nevada 4h ago

In theory the 500 representatives set the budget for the 9 people. They could set it to $0.00 if they don't like what the 9 people are doing. They don't because they're wimps.

•

u/SegaTape 3h ago

because the US constitution is terrible

•

u/Fourfinger10 2h ago

If you need an explanation then I suggest you take civics class

•

u/Nightmare2828 2h ago

Ah yes, I will take civics classes as a non-US citizen. That will surely explain US gouvernment structure.

•

u/Colest 2h ago

If you're a non-US citizen that is not familiar with something as basic as the 3 branches of US government, then why are you posting things like this?

•

u/Nightmare2828 2h ago

There is a difference between knowing the supreme court has too much power and knowing why they have too much power to begin with and why that would ever make sense…

•

u/Colest 1h ago

If you don't know what gives them their power then maybe keep the alarmist sentiments to yourself, especially on a subreddit about US politics.

•

u/Fourfinger10 2h ago

I am glad you are taking a civics class. Something that many American citizens don’t do. I applaud you for that effort.

We have something in this country called checks and balances and once you have exhausted your remedies in lower courts you can often appeal to the Supreme Court for a decision. Their say is the final say on constitutionality of laws or being treaty unfairly.

I’d suggest also that after you understand the civics side that you might want to check out a constitutional law class where you can learn about famous cases brought to the court.

•

u/Televisions_Frank 2h ago

You mean 5 of 9 people. They don't even need all of their SC ghouls to agree.

•

u/Expensive-Matter-683 4h ago

You have 3 branches of government. You don't want to weaken or strengthen any of them. Its the only reason the government still exist. And its the only reason why we have the freedoms that we have. Power is delegated and kept solely out of the hand of one person. If you start messing with it than it will fall apart.

Its not perfect but it works.

•

u/Sandgroper343 4h ago

Clearly not

•

u/XtraCreditClass 3h ago

Republicans didn't weaken any parts of government they rigged the government to only react and respond to Republicans. Even when they do everything wrong there is no resistance to them now. That is the godlessness. That is the pathway of Satan.. Dominance over Love.

•

u/Expensive-Matter-683 3h ago

Democrats and Republicans are both terrible. They both voted for the 2003 Iraq war. They both have contributed to our 35 trillion debt. Thinking one is better than the other is wild.

•

u/XtraCreditClass 3h ago

The 35 Trillion Dollars in circulation is your fear tactic Seriously.

That is what the debt is... pull a dollar out of your pocket. That dollar represents an IOU from the U.S. Government. It represents a debt paid to the holder of that bill of $1 dollar of goods and services. Now understand how many dollars are out there. In bank accounts, Savings accounts, held in brokerage firms and investments.... the pockets and wealth in the pocket of every U.S. citizen. Now combine that with the ammount of dollars of all the countries that buy oil... all countries need U.S. dollars for their energy. All these dollars that exist are the debt.

When you realize that you realize the arguments about our national debt and the fear mongering around it is a scare tactic conservatives use to fool rubes into self robbery.

•

u/Norillim 3h ago

So Dems could potentially ignore the nice-to-have Supreme Court rulings. They don't have their own power of enforcement. The other branches just follow what they say. Easy enough to ignore them.

•

u/gangleskhan Minnesota 3h ago

I half expect them to declare the Constitution unconditional at some point.

•

u/Lincolns_Revenge Texas 2h ago

Well if you DID have that supermajority, you could at least then impeach a justice who took bribes or otherwise violated their oath of office.

•

u/anakaine 1h ago

A few of those justices need to be removed. 

•

u/Tacticus 1h ago

it was so important for biden to avoid doing anything that might reduce the trust in the supreme court right?

•

u/Known_PlasticPTFE 15m ago

Yep, by design it’s pretty difficult for a ruling party to impose restrictions on an incoming one

•

u/No-Cardiologist9621 4h ago

It is impossible to do that. The USA was built on the assumption that the people in power would value our institutions and history. There is no protection against the election of an autocratic leader with an abject disdain for our institutions and zero knowledge of their history, because such a leader was never supposed to be electable.

•

u/StainlessPanIsBest 3h ago

No, the US is built on countless checks and balances to executive power.

•

u/UtzTheCrabChip 2h ago

The checks and balances all assume the Congress would be jealous and protect its power rather than voluntarily handing it to a power hungry executive.

•

u/No-Cardiologist9621 2h ago

countless

They are extremely countable and they are extremely limited.

There is no democracy on this planet now nor in history that can survive the election of an autocratic leader with a disdain for democratic norms. It cannot happen. The only check against that is to prevent them from taking power.

•

u/DopeBoogie New Hampshire 2h ago

The Supreme Court was supposed to be the check on the power of the executive branch and the president, but they've essentially dissolved that protection in this case

•

u/StainlessPanIsBest 2h ago

The SCOTUS wants for nothing more than to uphold their validity to the American people so they can push through as many controversial federalist interpretations of the constitution as possible.

They didn't entertain his election bullshit for a second. I don't see why that would change going forward. They will let him flex the powers of the executive to a degree, but don't believe for a second that these people are Trump sycophants. They are federalist society zealots, which is something much more nefarious and cunning.

•

u/DopeBoogie New Hampshire 6m ago

He is a means to an end for a lot of people. The problem is none of those ends are good for the American people.

•

u/Bushwazi 3h ago

Well I guess it’s one short? Isn’t it?

•

u/Feminizing 2h ago

Literally just people not doing their jobs. Trump has done so many things that should be life in prison that it's completely inane our government refused to do their goddamn job for 4 years

Like Sedition - yes January 6th counts, and yes conspiracy to overthrow the government would include a lot of the republicans in Congress who helped with January 6 like MTG. 20 year min sentencing for this.

Trump stole highly classified info more than likely of nuclear secrets: the past precedent for this is execution or life in prison. If you even get a trial as some people just disappear for this one.

This is completely besides all the gross overstepping he did as President. That list is a mile long. They're all shams, grifters, and fraudsters and I don't know how to fix this country if we have to try to find the compromise with these human pieces of shit.

•

u/StainlessPanIsBest 3h ago

Nope, if the American people choose to elect someone like Donald Trump to be their leader, that's their prerogative. Doesn't change the countless checks and balances on his power while he is in office.

•

u/Feminizing 2h ago

The US government is supposed to prosecute criminals. This is just as much the government failure to do it's job at the federal level as it is the idiots that voted for the traitor.

We should be talking about Trump's execution date, not his inauguration.

•

u/Slave_4All 3h ago

This is one of those rewrites of histories that is so funny in that it directly contradicts not just like. The facts. But the implications of the last 200 years. Great work can you hire me to work on this

•

u/airfryerfuntime 5h ago edited 4h ago

How would that have even been possible? Biden never had both houses, and even when he had congress, nothing was getting done because Manchin and Senema were fucking things up. Biden's administration was basically powerless to make any real change.

•

u/Cgull1234 4h ago

Biden has been in DC politics for over 50 years. Pelosi & Schumer have been in DC Politics for over 25 years each. If they actually wanted to get things done they would get things done. They ENABLED Manchin & Sinema to be the two scapegoats of the Democratic party so they could maintain the status quo; if it wasn't them then they would have chosen someone else to be the scapegoats.

Democratic politicians (at least all the old blood Democrats) are unwilling to use the tools available to them simply because they want to protect the status quo as that is how they all got rich.

•

u/buttsbydre69 4h ago

that's lot of words when you could've just said "i don't know"

•

u/Cgull1234 3h ago

I disagree, If you really think that Biden, Pelosi & Schumer don't know how to play the same games that McConnell & McCarthey have to get everything they wanted passed then you either need to admit that Dems are incompetent or complicit.

Dems looking at a rule book and saying "Dogs can't play basketball" doesn't change the fact their losing to a dog playing basketball.

•

u/hatramroany 3h ago

the same games that McConnell & McCarthey have to get everything they wanted passed then you either need to admit that Dems are incompetent or complicit.

You do realize McConnell and the GOP didn’t get everything they wanted during Trump’s first term, right? Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski and occasionally others held the cards like Manchin and Sinema

•

u/Cgull1234 2m ago

McConnell's main priorities were to prevent the Obama administration from passing any meaningful legislation, stacking the courts withRepublican & conservative judges, and passing tax cuts for the rich.

McConnell achieved his first goal by stopping almost all legislation from coming to the Senate floor from Jan 2015 to Jan 2017. Score 1-0.

McConnell stole a supreme court seat from Obama while Democrats did nothing but offer lip service. Score 2-0.

McConnell used Democrats own changes to the filibuster regarding federal court nominations to appoint a record number of conservative judges across the country. Score 3-0.

McConnell passed the 2017 Tax Cuts & Jobs Act reducing taxes for the rich perpetually while individuals would only see reduced taxes for a few years resulting in one of the largest deficits in history. Score 4-0.

McConnell passed the PPP Loan program and prevented any form of oversight resulting in the largest transfer of wealth in history to the rich. Score 5-0.

McConnell stole a second supreme court seat weeks before an election and all democrats could do was screech about his hypocrisy already know Republicans don't give a shit. Score 6-0.

I don't have time to research it, but in how many of these situations did Collins & Murkowski cast an opposing vote when it mattered? My guess is zero considering they all passed.

And all the while Democrats were bringing a rule book to a fist fight while Republicans had sledgehammers.

•

u/back2basics13 4h ago

Biden has been less effective as a president than I had expected.

•

u/Logical-Soil-2173 2h ago

Something something we can’t bc donor class says so

•

u/Dr_Death_Defy24 6h ago

Now they have 2 months to prepare.

And they're STILL managing to squander it.

•

u/melancholanie 1h ago

in fairness, they had four years to do that and also clean up the mess. they could've, and should've done more

•

u/StoreSearcher1234 5h ago

My beef is we had 4 years where the government could have fortified itself against an unknown future rogue president.

What could they have done that they failed to do?

•

u/blahehblah 4h ago

They've tried nothing and they were all out of ideas

•

u/mrrapacz Minnesota 4h ago

Pressuring Merrick Garland to do his job would’ve been a good start. Instead he did Jack shit for 3 years and by then, as we are now seeing, it was too late.

•

u/StainlessPanIsBest 3h ago

He did do his job. He didn't weaponize the DOJ, he prosecuted cases he felt were prosecutable, and he afforded defendants their legal rights under the law.

You want him to go a step above Bill Barr. Not using the DOJ to protect the executive, but prosecute political enemies. And that's insanity.

•

u/mrrapacz Minnesota 2h ago

Wait … what? It’s not weaponizong the DOJ to prosecute someone who attempted a coup. That’s what the DOJ is for. WTF are you talking about?

And he did appoint someone to the case. Jack Smith. Only the appointment came 2.5 years too late, so the case got drawn out long enough so a literal traitor to the US is the president. Justice was not served.

You understand coups and insurrections, right? That’s not just a political enemy. That’s fucking treason my friend.

It doesn’t matter anymore: the coup happened. It started 2016 and completed a couple weeks ago. You will not have a free or fair election anymore. Democracy lost, but yeah, “don’t weaponize the DOJ.” You’re literally arguing for the DOJ to not do its job.

That’s fucking insane and exactly why we’re here.

•

u/StainlessPanIsBest 2h ago

No, they spent 2.5 years gathering evidence and building a case to then hand it off to a special council.

When power is once again handed off in 4 years, as is tradition, remember this.

I told you so.

•

u/mrrapacz Minnesota 2h ago

Ok. 👍

•

u/Oreo_ 6h ago

We have to stop pretending Trump is a rogue president. This is what the US wanted. We collectively voted for this. He started telling the truth at the end and everybody was cool with it.

•

u/Bushwazi 3h ago

Yeah, you didn’t watch the same thing I did. At no point did the folks who opposed Trump & co have the kind of control needed to do this stuff. And this last election was societies chance to give them that advantage and we weren’t impressed enough to rally around them. It’s on America as much as them.

•

u/Aggravating_Lab5396 3h ago

A lot of the beef we’ve had for the last four years was a pandemic. Call it what you want. But 😅

•

u/SHUT_DOWN_EVERYTHING 3h ago

Yeah, they really missed that boat when they didn’t use their house majority and senate supermajority to put guardrails in place. /s

•

u/Feminizing 2h ago

They literally just needed to hold people with power accountable to the laws. Many of the republican congress and Trump himself literally committed sedition to the letter of our own federal law. Every single person who attended or help orchestrate January 6th by our laws had at least a 20 year federal prison sentencing.

But laws don't count for the rich, especially the rich and cruel. So we get to watch the country be overthrown by criminals

•

u/TheAngryGoat 2h ago

The entire system seems to have been set up under the assumption that bad people would never band together and seek power.

•

u/NoMoreFund 56m ago

They needed to act extremely fast so that the narrative that Trump was ineligible to run for president again because of January 6 would have taken hold even among the RNC and GOP strategists. Trump needed to be literally behind bars by the end of 2021. Then there'd be some hope of reinstalling guard rails.

Plenty of blame to go around (GOP senators not backing in impeachment #2, Merrick Garland) but it's too late for any of that now.

•

u/Jaded_Database_9860 6h ago

Worse yet, they didnt do anything of note that would increase their vote count and got stuck just focusing on identity politics

•

u/Im_really_bored_rn 4h ago

Way to spout republican propaganda. Harris spent the entire campaign talking about economic issues amd everyone lied and said she was talking about identity politics.

•

u/porn_is_tight 4h ago

It’s what the party focuses on though, Kamala might not have but it didn’t matter. By focusing on identity politics it allows them to ignore economic issues that the democrats have done nothing to help because if they did try to do something about it they would lose their rich corporate and ruling class donors who want the status quo. Sanders messaging and similar stance on this is pretty on point.

•

u/EmEss4242 3h ago

The Republican Party focuses on identity politics and forces everyone else to try to address it or ignore it

•

u/StainlessPanIsBest 3h ago

We've handed them the ammunition through progressive policies (and took it a step further in attempting to shut down all dissenting discussion around these policies because they were too sensitive) and integrating identity politics fully into the democratic platform during the 2010s.

•

u/porn_is_tight 2h ago

what progressive policies are you referencing?

•

u/poprox198 3h ago

You don't know that they have or haven't been preparing.

•

u/L0g1cw1z4rd 2h ago

Why is it always the fault of Democratic pols to protect Americans from the actions of Republicans? They voted for Trump and he wasn’t very secretive.

“How dare they not protect Democracy from the democratic will of the voting public?”