I have recently discovered an insightful newsletter by by @rbhubbell that lays out facts, supporting data & an optimistic take on many issues viewed as dooming Democrats. For an example, see rest of this thread and then you will want to subscribe at roberthubbell.substack.com/?utm_campaign=…
2/Today's newletter was about why Schumer was right to call the losing procedural on allowing debate on the merits of the Freedom to Vote Act, not even on its substance. Forcing all Senate Republicans to vote against it, he said it was a necessary loss...
3/It forced Republicans to take a stand on voting rights and admit that the existence of their party is dependent on voter suppression. Though the result is disappointing for Democrats, he said, "the loss was strategic." Senator Schumer knew that the vote would fail, but that
4/"The point of the futile vote was to expose the anti-democratic core of the Republican Party—just as civil rights advocates in the 1960s engaged in acts of civil disobedience to expose the evil of Jim Crow laws.
5/"In the process of being arrested and beaten for seeking a seat at lunch counter or on a bus, the civil rights advocates changed the hearts and minds of the American people. That change was the foundation for the greatest advance in civil rights in a century.
6/"So, too, with today’s defeat of the motion to debate the Freedom to Vote Act. There is no longer any room for debate over whether “moderate” or “good” Republicans will support democracy. They will not. Today’s vote made that fact plain for all to see.
7/"Senators Manchin and Sinema no longer have a good faith basis for defending the filibuster. Although the loss may not change their minds, the repeated display of depravity by Senate Republicans will change the hearts and minds of enough Americans to propel us to victory."
8/"When that victory will be achieved is uncertain, but that it will be achieved is beyond doubt.
He concludes w the hope "that today’s loss will convince Manchin and Sinema to support a carve-out in the filibuster rule for voting rights" though he doubts that it will & notes...
9/"Unless Manchin & Sinema relent in their exaltation of a Senate procedural rule above the civil rights of all Americans, voting reform will remain unattainable until 2022 or 2024, at the earliest."
10/I hope we carve out voting rights from the filibuster rule and stop 24% of America's population from blocking action wanted by the other 76%. I want Congress to pass voting rights protections now, including prevention of votes not being counted.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
.@jbouie said so much so powerfully that I'm starting a thread with some of his best lines, but recommend reading the whole piece re SCOTUS threat to our rights and its loss of credibility. nytimes.com/2021/09/03/opi…
the court has essentially nullified the constitutional rights of millions of American women without so much as an argument...This isn’t judicial review as much as it is a raw exercise of judicial power. ...
It is common enough knowledge that the Supreme Court’s power to shape American society is a function not so much of its formal power under the Constitution as it is of its popular legitimacy. And much of that legitimacy rests on the idea that the court is acting fairly, ...
1/Today's news from the #ChauvinTrial. #GeorgeFloyd described as a vibrant, active man by his girlfriend & surviving an earlier drug overdose, but not a knee on his neck. Chauvain described by his police supervisor as using unnecessary force after Floyd was handcuffed and prone.
2/Paramedics describe Floyd's medical condition when they arrived - basically too late to save him, but say police could have done chest compressions and saved Floyd. Of course, all that was necessary to save him was for Chauvin & the others to get off him once he was handcuffed.
3/Off-duty EMT on scene earlier who wanted to help but was barred from helping also could have saved him. All the evidence is pointing to depraved indifference to Floyd's life. Defense scoring no points imho and insulting to witnesses grief and guilt and to jury with arguments...
1/Great question from @Lawssenhop about extending the Statute of Limitations to allow charging a former president who couldn't be indicted while in office. It's complex and requires a thread to answer so here goes.
2/In general, ex post facto laws are prohibited by Article 1 of the Constitution if they retroactively change the rules of evidence in a criminal case, retroactively alter the definition of a crime, retroactively increase the punishment for a past criminal act, or
3/punish conduct that was legal when committed. Courts have interpreted what can and cannot be done but have left unanswered whether extending the SOL after the conduct is over would be allowed.
Thread: 1/ Listening to @TheBeatWithAri and @Comey is saying no federal indictment of Trump because it would give him a platform. That is nonsense. Trump has a platform whatever DOJ does and whatever happens in any state civil or criminal case.
2/ Comey also says it's OK for states to indict him which gives Trump that platform in addition to social media and Fox.
Comey also says trial would give him platform for months and months. Nonsense. Federal sedition trial against him could be over in a week. One count, videos.
3/ Watergate trial against many defendants with Pres as co-conspirator and multiple charges took from Oct 1 to Jan 1. One sedition count against one defendant should be much simpler. Others guilty can be tried separately while he sits in jail.
1/Are you sleepless? Anxious? Are you overwhelmed by the avalanche of awful things 45 has said in recent weeks? Do you wonder why we are even discussing what we must do to assure "free and fair elections" and a "peaceful transition of power" if 45 loses? If so, follow me here.
2/I am outraged and speaking out and starting a list of the statements of Trump, Barr, McConnell and Graham that threaten democracy and the will of citizens. The list of past offenses is too long for a tweet, but I'll start a daily list starting now and include a few recent ones.
3/First, the one I find most awful: Trump's attack on voting, including his exhortation to "get rid of the ballots" so there won't be a transition, just a continuation of the Trump presidency. This was part of his refusal to promise a peaceful transition of power if he loses.
I’ll be watching Barr testify and I’ll try to keep you informed in case you can’t watch. Based on his audition memo, past performances before Congress, Flynn and Stone actions, and his prepared remarks for today, I don’t expect honesty.
He labels what I call protestors “rioters and anarchists.”He still says he is trying to “get to the bottom of the grave abuses involved in the bogus ‘Russiagate’ scandal.” And he claims he is ensuring “that there is one standard of justice that applies to everyone equally” while
dismissing case against Flynn who pleaded guilty and reducing Stone sentence and then letting 45 commute it and free Stone. He claims he is exercising independent judgment even though everything he has done follows what Trump wants.