The Ree will be unreal when Democrats start pulling the same shit. (Hopefully)

Republicans will erect their own Wailing Wall in D.C. and decry government overreach, without a single instance of introspection and personally, I simply cannot wait.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

Decorum, tradition and fairness are for losers.

The GOP knows they can personally profit most by abusing the system and for them there is no excuse for not doing so. Just as maximizing profits cannot tolerate constrictions due to things like environmental protection regulation, conduct in appointments requires this kind of behavior.

It's beyond time for the Democrats to eviscerate the Republican's influence on anything. Marginalize them into oblivion as they've tried to do to you. It's beyond high time the coalition of evil are put in a time-out like the misbehaving children they are.

The Ree will be unreal when Democrats start pulling the same shit. (Hopefully)

Republicans will erect their own Wailing Wall in D.C. and decry government overreach, without a single instance of introspection and personally, I simply cannot wait.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

Nobody does what Republicans are doing if they have any intention of leaving power or any fear of retribution. Judging by the last few decades of Democratic conduct, they're right to have no worries.

Why does the article lead with "historical norms" and push the textual illegality to the near bottom? I mean, I totally get that the actual law really is mere footnote at this point, but boy is it tiring to see it so thoroughly normalized.

The article leads with what happened. What Trump has actually done, in this instance, breaks a historical norm but is not illegal. The illegal action that I describe is speculative, it hasn't happened. It's also not in the "near bottom," it's in the first section of the story and then described throughout. From first section: "Since the FCC needs only three members for a quorum, adding a third Republican raises the possibility that Trump will fire the FCC’s only Democrat and give his party a 3-0 advantage. But stocking the commission with only Republicans would violate a law that prohibits any party from having an FCC supermajority, which could put the FCC’s decisions at greater risk of being blocked in court."

The Ree will be unreal when Democrats start pulling the same shit. (Hopefully)

Republicans will erect their own Wailing Wall in D.C. and decry government overreach, without a single instance of introspection and personally, I simply cannot wait.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

That's unlikely anytime soon, as Democrats actually fighting back will require generational change (mostly getting rid of every Boomer and Silent gen Democrat who still cares about looking bipartisan like it's still the 1980s GOP they're dealing with).

The Ree will be unreal when Democrats start pulling the same shit. (Hopefully)

Republicans will erect their own Wailing Wall in D.C. and decry government overreach, without a single instance of introspection and personally, I simply cannot wait.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

Why do you think they were so hot to gerrymander twice in the last decade?

Rules for thee, but not for me. The Republican Party should just make that their official motto at this point.

And give up "Fuck you, got mine"? Never.

I swear, there are days when I don't give a rat's ass what the Democratic platform is so long as revenge is the top ten priorities.

Constantly complaining how things are rigged against him.....

Is there no longer an eligible quorum at the FCC if Anna Gomez resigns?

The Communications Act requires the FCC to have three members for a quorum. The US telecom law also forbids supermajorities on the FCC by specifying that “the maximum number of commissioners who may be members of the same political party shall be a number equal to the least number of commissioners which constitutes a majority of the full membership of the Commission.”

If Trump decides to follow this law, Republicans would not be able to hold all three seats on a three-member FCC. On a four-member commission, three Republicans would be the “least number of commissioners which constitutes a majority.”

Isn't there an easy loophole here? Trump can fire the Democrat and then appoint two members of the "MAGA Party" to the FCC - that way they technically won't be Republicans. Or even just use the Libertarian Party, which nowadays seems to kowtow to government power as long as it's coming from the right tribe.

The Ree will be unreal when Democrats start pulling the same shit. (Hopefully)

Republicans will erect their own Wailing Wall in D.C. and decry government overreach, without a single instance of introspection and personally, I simply cannot wait.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

The reesong will be beautiful music to my ears too. But it can't keep going back and forth like this. The orange admin has proven that the US system of governance is broken and always was broken, there just hadn't been anyone deplorable enough in the driver's seat to prove it.

What I want to know is how can it be truly fixed, and will anyone actually do it? How can things be arranged that this will never happen again? The only thing worse than having to bear this terrible administration would be doing it repeatedly into the future.

The article leads with what happened. What Trump has actually done, in this instance, breaks a historical norm but is not illegal. The illegal action that I describe is speculative, it hasn't happened. It's also not in the "near bottom," it's in the first section of the story and then described throughout. From first section: "Since the FCC needs only three members for a quorum, adding a third Republican raises the possibility that Trump will fire the FCC’s only Democrat and give his party a 3-0 advantage. But stocking the commission with only Republicans would violate a law that prohibits any party from having an FCC supermajority, which could put the FCC’s decisions at greater risk of being blocked in court."

Obligatory not a lawyer, but the provisions of 47 U.S. Code § 154 seem fairly clear.

(a) Number of commissioners; appointment
The Federal Communications Commission (in this chapter referred to as the “Commission”) shall be composed of five commissioners appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, one of whom the President shall designate as chairman.

The wording here is explicitly "shall be composed of five commissioners [...]."

(b) Qualifications
(5) The maximum number of commissioners who may be members of the same political party shall be a number equal to the least number of commissioners which constitutes a majority of the full membership of the Commission.

If "a majority of the full membership of the Commission" does not refer to a full 5 member panel, then there's absolutely nothing stopping Trump from creating a 2-0 panel.

The Ree will be unreal when Democrats start pulling the same shit. (Hopefully)

Republicans will erect their own Wailing Wall in D.C. and decry government overreach, without a single instance of introspection and personally, I simply cannot wait.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

Which is exactly why republicans nationwide are pulling-out all the dirty election stops to ensure none of that ever comes to pass. The coming midterms might well be the finishing blow to constitutional democracy in the US.

Isn't there an easy loophole here? Trump can fire the Democrat and then appoint two members of the "MAGA Party" to the FCC - that way they technically won't be Republicans. Or even just use the Libertarian Party, which nowadays seems to kowtow to government power as long as it's coming from the right tribe.

Yes, that's why the previous section of the article explains that possibility: "Nominating a fifth commissioner who is neither a Republican or Democrat, but who supports the Carr and Trump agenda, could effectively give Trump a 4-1 majority without technically violating the law prohibiting an FCC supermajority." And: "Hypothetically, Trump could aim for a 3-0 advantage or replace Gomez with someone 'who qualifies as a non-Republican' and give Republicans a 3-1 FCC majority in which the minority member is from a third party or is an independent."

Obligatory not a lawyer, but the provisions of 47 U.S. Code § 154 seem fairly clear.

The wording here is explicitly "shall be composed of five commissioners [...]."

If "a majority of the full membership of the Commission" does not refer to a full 5 member panel, then there's absolutely nothing stopping Trump from creating a 2-0 panel.

The FCC needs three members for a quorum as the article mentions a few times. That would stop them from creating a 2-0 panel.

Never forget that 77+ million Republicans voted for this.

Until it affects them adversely, then it's "I never voted for this."

The FCC needs three members for a quorum as the article mentions a few times. That would stop them from creating a 2-0 panel.

Doh, I'm going to have more coffee.

Doh, I'm going to have more coffee.

Even if you misread the statutes, well done in actually reading and trying to parse them yourself, rather than solely trusting a third-party's explanation. That's a level of rigor that's admirable.

Racking my tiny mind trying to figure out where they could find a D that would vote with the R majority. Best I could come up with is to draft old Joe Manchin if he's willing to come out of retirement.

Fetterman seems fine with it.

That's unlikely anytime soon, as Democrats actually fighting back will require generational change (mostly getting rid of every Boomer and Silent gen Democrat who still cares about looking bipartisan like it's still the 1980s GOP they're dealing with).

The current Democratic leadership is only impotent when it comes to fighting the far right. They are very quick to mobilize against their own base and activists on the left . . . you know, the people who actually want to do something.

But stocking the commission with only Republicans would violate a law that prohibits any party from having an FCC supermajority, which could put the FCC’s decisions at greater risk of being blocked in court.

The problem is our courts take a significant amount of time to rule on these actions, which result in things happening that shouldn't and become impossible to undo.

The whole tariff situation - ultimately proven to be unlawful, but prices of everything went up and all the corporations got to double dip on it, with no actually recompense for consumers. Letting the FCC have any amount of unfettered rule would decimate the internet and communications as we know it for consumers, allowing corporations to further pillage and wreck our wallets and our data/identities. It's hard to claw back money from Comcast or Verizon as it is.

But stocking the commission with only Republicans would violate a law that prohibits any party from having an FCC supermajority

And we all know the current administration would NEVER dare violate our laws, right

I mean it's not like he would personally accept an obvious bribe from a foreign government... And when expect the US tax payer to Trek it out in luxury gold for him to take when he leaves (lol) in 2.25 years...

I'm sure Republicans won't rush through an amendment that strikes that annoying little provision off the Act allowing him to fill all 5 with his lackies

The only optimistic bit left in me is hoping against hope that by the time Trump leaves/is wheeled out of the office, he fucks our country SO hard, that even his staunchest supporters turn on him. That will hopefully cripple the GOP for decades, making them virtually unelectable.
That’s right, the optimist in me wishes for the worst.

Can I get a unicorn full of gold too while we're at it?

The only way this ends is if a lot of Americans disappear forever.

This word is working harder than a corporate wage slave on mandatory overtime at this point...

Nobody does what Republicans are doing if they have any intention of leaving power or any fear of retribution. Judging by the last few decades of Democratic conduct, they're right to have no worries.

Sadly, I think you're right.

That's unlikely anytime soon, as Democrats actually fighting back will require generational change (mostly getting rid of every Boomer and Silent gen Democrat who still cares about looking bipartisan like it's still the 1980s GOP they're dealing with).

I 213% agree.

Until it affects them adversely, then it's "I never voted for this."

Even after that, a disturbing number of them, probably a majority, still support Trump and would vote for him again. The delusion is profound.

Decorum, tradition and fairness are for losers.

Hey don't criticize those "centrist" and "electable" democrats that's their entire loser pitch!