Historian, Hayes Chair @OhioState Mershon Ctr Carnegie Fellow 6 Books: Ideology in US Foreign Relations, Rethinking American Grand Strategy, Promise & Peril. ⚾️
Jan 4, 2023 • 23 tweets • 5 min read
Prompted by @kathleen_belew I'm going to do a thread, with an eye to political history, of speculative creative things Democrats could theoretically do in this situation of unfolding round after round of dysfunctional speaker voting in the House. Feel free to suggest yours 1/?
First thing to note is: that the speakership requires a majority of members present, so in 2021 Pelosi won with 216 votes. This means, among other things, absence presents opportunities... 2/?
May 22, 2021 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
As anyone with a modest understanding of Revolutionary War military history would be able to tell Rep Cawthorn, Washington was so concerned with deadly pathogens he sent smallpox-immune troops to occupy Boston, set policy to inoculate troops to prevent spread. Some covered faces.
Sorry @ChuckGrassley, historian here, you are wrong on both counts: 1) you imply the 1918 flu "was" Spanish; 2) they + others did object. The influenza epidemic almost definitely originated in Kansas in early 1918; US & wartime gov'ts minimized risk/hid info on flu...
Neutral Spain, on the other hand, did not impose wartime strictures against media coverage of the ravages of the flu, they covered it closely when King Alfonso XIII became very sick, & the world followed, assuming Spain as an origin point -- "Spanish Flu" or "La Grippe"
Mar 11, 2020 • 62 tweets • 20 min read
History provides great insights about the importance of honest gov't communication, trust in local, state, & federal officials, information distribution, & most of all proactive efforts to get ahead of a public health emergency. Let's consider the 1918 influenza epidemic. Thread.
I will begin with two main insights from the 1918-1919 period: 1. Where there were cancellations & postponements of large events, gatherings, other activities, as well as efforts to take more precautions, including what we'd now call "SoCals distancing" worked to slow spread.
Oct 17, 2019 • 7 tweets • 3 min read
@BrianDeLay If only we could know what the founders thought about this & if they would confirm John Yoo's view. Oh wait, we do! July 20, 1787 they discussed this and EXPLICITLY rejected Yoo's view, including some who once held such an opinion reversing course, see: avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/d…@BrianDeLay Maybe John Yoo should stick to law and leave history to the historians.
Oct 9, 2019 • 28 tweets • 7 min read
Molly Reynolds & Margaret Taylor make some great historical points here. If you are invested in questions of Hors subpoena power, read @lawfareblog "What Powers Does a Formal Impeachment Inquiry Give the House?" lawfareblog.com/what-powers-do…
Impeachment proceedings against "both Presidents Nixon & Clinton began with a vote by the full House of Representatives directing the judiciary committee “to investigate fully and completely whether sufficient grounds exist for the House of Representatives to exercise ...
Oct 5, 2019 • 14 tweets • 6 min read
Thinking a little today about Congress's powers related to subpoenas, which date back to materials requests in 1792, Warren in 1957 “The power of the Congress to conduct investigations is inherent in the legislative process." Here's a good overview: law.justia.com/constitution/u…
Odd to me that some right now question this, so let's begin with the Constitution: "All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives." U.S. Constitution, Article I, section 1
Sep 30, 2019 • 13 tweets • 4 min read
Let's look back at the 1787 debates over the meaning of impeachment. For me Madison's ideas are central: He "thought it indispensable that some provision should be made for defending the Community agst. the incapacity, negligence or perfidy of the chief Magistrate...."
"...The limitation of the period of his service, was not a sufficient security. He might lose his capacity after his appointment. He might pervert his administration into a scheme of peculation or oppression. He might betray his trust to foreign powers."
