This morning Dems were all talking publicly about doing away with the filibuster, adding 2 more justices, 2 more states, and 4 Dem senators. But now “muh norms” is back. Life comes at you fast.
I’ve been thinking a lot about the @DashaBurns interview of Fetterman. I’ve been around a little while and it’s just astonishing how the reaction to an interview like that within her profession has changed over the years.
when I first started in politics, a journalist was celebrated within the industry for having the courage to report objective facts that were either omitted by colleagues or covered up entirely
the partisanship of the subject was immaterial. There was a basic integrity that was fostered from one generation to the next about seeking truth regardless of how it impacted the constituency of the outlet.
Here’s how the inquiry works: So they came at me with the same omission of the specific language in the statute that speaks to water being provided at a polling place, as if I’m some idiot who doesn’t do his homework. When I cite their omission all of a sudden the goalposts move.
Then the queries shifted to whether I believed people who were not electioneering would be criminally prosecuted for providing water. I said it was an interesting question but not one I weighed in upon.
First, you will notice that somehow the “White House, GOP Face Heat” for a program that was passed unanimously. (This newspaper drastically overplayed Pelosi and Schumer’s role in CARES but now they’re nowhere to be found. Do we still need the House to make laws, or no?)
Second - the premise is that hotels and restaurant chains ran the fund dry. Set aside basic understanding of franchise models or how they calculate that employees of some entities as less deserving than others, later in the story they let this slip:
Quick thread this AM on yesterday:
If you’ve spent time around the Senate you understand the polarizing effect 10+ entirely partisan, predictable & unnecessary votes (into the wee hours) will have for this trial.
Usually towards the end of major Senate debates, after the minority has exhausted all other options, they begin forcing political votes where the outcome is not in doubt. It’s a unifying action that is a signal the fight is over but they’re going to try to make you pay a price
I’ve never seen a leader successfully reach for that playbook right off the top before a debate has actually begun. It’s particularly strange when they have hopes of persuading a handful of senators to cross party lines at a later stage.
My favorite part of the fake news culture (and one reason it will never, ever repair itself with conservatives) is the commitment to promoting aggrieved Republican dissidents and promenade them to the public as if they’re leading voices. 1/2
If you look at the most prominent news organizations, they fill their “conservative” quota by printing and airing people who have either never been in the game, or were so prominently run out that they’re forever angry at the movement that ran them over.
Any prominent Republican who says something negative about their own party will spend two days responding to media inquiries about their point of view as if it’s somehow more profound than their opinion the other 99% of the time.