1/ Republicans are suddenly trying to pretend that their rush to confirm Amy Coney Barrett isn't about ACA repeal.

They are lying.

I've put together in one thread the story of their 10 year plan to get rid of the ACA. It all leads to this moment.

Please read the whole thing.

2/ From the start, Republicans were obsessed - I mean OBSESSED - with getting rid of the ACA. Nothing mattered more.

From 2010-2017, they tried to repeal all or part of the ACA 70 times. Their most high profile failure was, of course, in summer 2017.
https://t.co/wx97kNmKFR
3/ At first, Republicans' chanted "repeal and replace" - but they NEVER had a plan to replace it.

In 2017, with much fanfare, Paul Ryan unveiled the most serious replacement bill Republicans had ever offered. It ended health care for 23 million Americans.
https://t.co/wEKBpYYsyI
4/ But after McCain's thumbs down in 2017, Republicans came up with a new plan. If voters wouldn't allow them to repeal the ACA through the elected branch of government, then they would go another way - the courts.

McConnell and Trump put together a devious, detailed plan.
5/ The plan began with tucking into the 2017 Trump tax bill a repeal of the individual mandate tax. Curiously, the bill left intact the mandate.

This was purposeful, bc the Supreme Court had upheld the ACA in 2012 based on the existence of the tax.
https://t.co/zXbVf3RKWi
6/ Then McConnell began his campaign to pack the federal courts w anti-ACA ideologues who would rule against the ACA.

He blocked Obama's nominees for 2 years, creating 100+ vacancies for Trump, and most importantly, stole a SCOTUS nomination from Obama.
https://t.co/U8GENmdlYx
7/ Then, the court strategy began. 20 GOP AGs filed a suit alleging that the repeal of the mandate tax required the entire ACA to be invalidated (surprise!).

When Trump took office, he broke with precedent and joined the suit against his own government.
https://t.co/voNYHwOjkh
8/ Many thought the suit, Texas v. U.S., was bogus, but they underestimated McConnell and Trump's plan. Last December, the 5th Circuit ruled for the plaintiffs - the entire ACA should be invalidated.

It was a Trump appointed judge who provided the pivotal vote (surprise again!).
9/ Now the case is in front of SCOTUS. Alito and Thomas have already ruled against the ACA. Their votes are known. And really, so are those of Kavanaugh/Gorsuch. Trump promised to only appoint judges who would strike down the ACA. So the court is now likely 4-4 on the case.
10/ So Trump decided to take no chances when picking the deciding vote. Amy Coney Barrett is a no doubter. She is vocal in her belief that the ACA is unconstitutional. She's a lock to be the 5th vote to invalidate the ACA.

https://t.co/8IjRwy7jPN
11/ That's why Republicans are rushing her nomination. The hearing on the case is the week after election day. They NEED Coney-Barrett on the court for the hearing, so that they can get a 5-4 decision to invalidate the ACA by early next year.

So their plan can be complete.

More from Politics

We’ve been getting calls and outreach from Queens residents all day about this.

The community’s response? Outrage.


Amazon is a billion-dollar company. The idea that it will receive hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks at a time when our subway is crumbling and our communities need MORE investment, not less, is extremely concerning to residents here.

When we talk about bringing jobs to the community, we need to dig deep:
- Has the company promised to hire in the existing community?
- What’s the quality of jobs + how many are promised? Are these jobs low-wage or high wage? Are there benefits? Can people collectively bargain?

Displacement is not community development. Investing in luxury condos is not the same thing as investing in people and families.

Shuffling working class people out of a community does not improve their quality of life.

We need to focus on good healthcare, living wages, affordable rent. Corporations that offer none of those things should be met w/ skepticism.

It’s possible to establish economic partnerships w/ real opportunities for working families, instead of a race-to-the-bottom competition.
THREAD:
Good afternoon, followers of frivolous election litigation. There's a last-minute entry in the competition for dumbest pre-inauguration lawsuit - a totally loony effort to apparently leave the entire USA without a government.

We'll start with the complaint in a minute.

But first, I want to give you a quick explanation for why I'm going to keep talking about these cases even after the inauguration.

They're part of an ongoing effort - one that's not well-coordinated but is widespread - to discredit our fundamental system of government.

It's a direct descendent, in more ways than one, of birtherism. And here's the thing about birtherism. It might have been a joke to a lot of people, but it was extremely pernicious. It obviously validated the racist "not good enough to be President" crowd. But that wasn't all.

Don't get me wrong, that was bad enough. Validating racism helped put the kind of shitbird who would tweet this from an official government account into power. But it didn't stop


(Also, if you agree with Pompeo about multiculturalism - the legendary melting pot - not being what this country is all about, you need to stop following me now. And maybe go somewhere and think about your life choices and what made you such a tool.)

You May Also Like