Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Hot air and ill-informed banter

We will not go back.

With all due respect and assumptions of good faith, please fuck off into the sun.

Anne Laurie is a fucking hero in so many ways. ~ Betty Cracker

In after Baud. Damn.

Hi god, it’s us. Thanks a heap, you’re having a great week and it’s only Thursday!

These days, even the boring Republicans are nuts.

There are no moderate republicans – only extremists and cowards.

It’s a good piece. click on over. but then come back!!

If rights aren’t universal, they are privilege, not rights.

How stupid are these people?

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires Republicans to act in good faith.

Republicans cannot even be trusted with their own money.

When you’re a Republican, they let you do it.

Dear media: perhaps we ought to let Donald Trump speak for himself!

“Until such time as the world ends, we will act as though it intends to spin on.”

Let the trolls come, and then ignore them. that’s the worst thing you can do to a troll.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

Celebrate the fucking wins.

Historically it was a little unusual for the president to be an incoherent babbling moron.

One way or another, he’s a liar.

Oh FFS you might as well trust a 6-year-old with a flamethrower.

Speaking of republicans, is there a way for a political party to declare intellectual bankruptcy?

Let’s bury these fuckers at the polls 2 years from now.

You are here: Home / Politics / Open Thread (and Raskin Is Right)

Reader Interactions

133Comments

  1. 1.

    hrprogressive

    On the one hand, he is “right” in the sense that, you know, “Law & Order” and all of that.

    On the other hand, he and the rest of the Democratic Party are absolutely deluded into thinking that the Fascist GOP has any interest in abiding by any of the things he’s outlined if/when they either obtain full power lawfully, or by force.

    The Democratic Party has no answers for what they will do if/when that occurs, and that’s what troubles me so deeply.

  3. 3.

    Memory Pallas

    There used to be this step where you could convince someone to resign on their own (Franken.) That’s probably gone from the tool set forever. If people are being expelled by their peers, then waiting for due process seems prudent.

  4. 4.

    Leto

    @Memory Pallas: ​ their peers would come to them, and basically convince them to resign. Or they would have a modicrum of shame for being caught, and resign. The current set of shitheels there 1) have no shame 2) don’t give a fuck and 3) only believe in power. I feel like we hashed this out quite a bit down below, so yeah. And I absolutely do understand where the people who don’t agree with Raskin are coming from (as someone who’s frequently on that side quite a bit), but I do agree with Raskin on this.

  5. 5.

    MattF

    I think Santos is a thorn in the side of the R party, a constant reminder of their beyond-brazen dishonesty. I won’t be at all sorry to see him eventually get what he so richly deserves, but the exact timing is unimportant, IMO.

  6. 6.

    Carol

    I agree with Raskin.  And the people trying to keep Trump off the ballot here in Colorado face the same problem.  I’m very much against the law suit now in the courts here for this reason.  It’s bad precedent and bad politically for the Ds, especially if he’s cleared of any wrong-doing.  And all it takes, I think, is one magat who votes innocent in any one of the juries sitting or scheduled to sit before November 2024.

  7. 7.

    smith

    The Rs are the type of people who, if you give them a gun, metaphorically speaking, they are certain to shoot somebody with it. Better not to give them a gun in the first place. Making it easy to expel members without first establishing a clearly-defined line that has to be crossed would lead to them treating it like they now treat impeachment — they’ll do it constantly just to put on a show.

  8. 8.

    Andrew Abshier

    The other thing I’ve seen pointed out is that Santos/Devolder becomes another millstone around the R’s neck, so this could have been a tactical “no” vote as well.   He represents much of the worst of the Republican Party.  Plus the R’s don’t get to say they did the right thing for once.

  9. 9.

    JoyceH

    Okay, but when is Santos’ trial? I keep remembering Ken Paxton in Texas, indicted in 2015 fercryinoutloud and still in office making trouble.

  10. 10.

    montanareddog

    @Leto:

    And I absolutely do understand where the people who don’t agree with Raskin are coming from (as someone who’s frequently on that side quite a bit), but I do agree with Raskin on this.

    This.

    People of good faith can disagree on this and no one on our side can question Jamie Raskin’s good faith

    It is a shitshow and shame upon the Grifters, Obstructionists and Perverts for protecting Santos. They are certainly not acting in good faith

  11. 11.

    eclare

    Thank you for this WaterGirl.  I wondered what the thinking was.

    Raskin has definitely earned my trust.

  12. 12.

    Alison Rose

    I’m torn. I see Raskin’s point, but also…fuck Santos. Or maybe send Santos to Jupiter’s moon Europa.

    I know, we can’t really send him there. But you know what you can send to Europa? Your name! You can have your name on board the spacecraft going to Europa next year. NASA is calling it a “message in a bottle” but considering there are already over 655,000 names, I’m presuming they’re not really putting each individual name in an individual bottle because that would have to be a mighty large spacecraft storage room. Maybe printing out lists in tiny font and cramming like 50 pages into each bottle or something. I know it’s a little silly, but it’s also kinda cool :

    ETA: Also at the link you can look at the “participation map” for the world and the US, and I’m proud to see California is way in the lead in the US. I’m also…a tiny bit confused that there are 123 names from North Korea, because I would’ve imagined that NASA would be something the NK government would totally block from the citizens’ knowledge.

  14. 14.

    artem1s

    The other problem with expelling without due process is the offenses often never go to trial and/or get covered up and swept under the rug. Once expelled their ability to bring more evidence to light and to censure or exonerate (Franken) is gone. Fearmongering about future GQP misusing their power doesn’t change anything. The responsibility to investigate is just as important as expelling. You can’t have justice if you don’t have all the facts out in the open. Expelling without due process is not justice, it’s just revenge.

  16. 16.

    smith

    @Carol: The CO trial is a bench trial, so one Goober on a jury can’t torpedo it. A greater worry might be SCOTUS, where it will likely end up, but to my mind, even if they find he can’t be disqualified for what he did, it doesn’t affect any of his criminal trials in which he has not been charged with insurrection. I think it will be helpful to have clarity on when and how the 14th can be invoked. If it requires a conviction for insurrection, so be it, but until it is clarified, it could become a weapon that can be loosely and maliciously applied. Better to get it settled through the courts now.

  17. 17.

    Leto

    @Alison Rose: ​
    Listen, we definitely have the technology to send him there. Not promising what type of condition he’ll arrive, but we can send him!

    @montanareddog: ​ They stopped acting in good faith back during Obama’s first term. I know we can argue it further back, but that was a definitive inflection point. The lesson they learned was power over anything else. Punish those that acquiesced, or appeared to, and just keep pushing that purity test.

  18. 18.

    JoyceH

    @Parfigliano: Definitely. Franken was railroaded. But that was a specific point in time – it was the height of the Me Too era, the Dems wanted to put themselves firmly on the I Believe Women side, and I think there was an impression that a lot of worse stories would be dropping at any moment. Remember that Franken had that unorthodox background for a lawmaker, comedy and entertainment, very suspicious. (Though in point of fact, the worst stories seem to come from the stuffiest professions, law and religion and all that. )

  19. 19.

    New Deal democrat

    I made my case in the below thread there there have been a number of prior expulsions, or resolutions where the Members resigned rather than face the music, including one where bribery was alleged, and there was no argument that the Congress must primly wait upon the Courts. But now that a fron pager has decreed that the opposite is correct, I will bow out.

    See you on some later thread.

  20. 20.

    MomSense

    @hrprogressive:

    What troubles me is that the Republican elected officials care so little for laws, ethics, morals, and norms.  As soon as the Democrats become like them, even in one instance, every last drop of hope is lost.
    It is also troubling that the press and voters fail to hold Republicans accountable.

  21. 21.

    Ken

    @Alison Rose: But you know what you can send to Europa? Your name!

    So if the Europans get mad because we landed on their moon, they’ll have my name?  No, thank you.

  22. 22.

    Alison Rose

    I hope it’s okay to share this here, and obviously this is very much an “only if you can and want to” thing. A friend of a friend is trying to raise money to pay for training school for her service dog. She needs to pay half the cost up front, which is $2k. If you’re able and wish to toss a few bucks her way, that would be great.

  24. 24.

    Geminid

    @WaterGirl: That’s if there is a trial. There is a real chance Santos will plead guilty before then. He’s looking at a long prison sentence if he doesn’t, and I think prosecutors have him wrapped up tight on a lot of counts.

  25. 25.

    Geminid

    @New Deal democrat: This is not an argument over whether Representatives have to wait for a criminal conviction to expel a member. That’s a choice they make. You say Raskin’s choice was a bad one, and other people say it was a good one. That happens a lot here.

  26. 26.

    mdblanche

    Don’t forget that expulsion requires a two thirds majority. Even if every Democrat present had supported it, it still would have needed at least fifty more Republican votes to have  passed.

  27. 27.

    Tim C.

    @hrprogressive:

    This is sadly similar to the position Abraham Lincoln was in prior to the attack on Fort Sumter.   Yes, the South was siezing federal property and even committing small scale military attacks.   Yes, there was ample reasonable evidence of that treason and rebellion being in progress beyond any level that could be justified.   Yes, the South was clearly moving on that path.   But Lincoln belived, probably correctly, that until there was that “BIG” event, he couldn’t as for Federal troops.

    The thing that we probably agree on was the events of January 6th were the act that was seditious and far beyond the pale in terms of the treason party.   Hell, even the Republicans for about 36 hours seemed to think so too.

    But it wasn’t.   The treason voters are still treason voters.

    So who knows, I hope Raskin is right, I just also hope we can hit peak wingnut someday before the republic falls.

  28. 28.

    Geminid

    I have not followed Trump’s New York civil fraud trial very closely,  but this morning I talked to a friend who has. He’s also a pretty sharp retired attorney. My friend thinks the judgement against Trump will exceed $500 million.

  29. 29.

    Omnes Omnibus

    There is a difference between resignation and expulsion.  The former is entirely within the control of the member and is subject to their decency, sense of shame, stubbornness, and sense of right and wrong.  The latter involves members of Congress overriding the result of an election.  The standard should be high.  I would say it should at least require results of an ethics investigation.  YMMV.

  31. 31.

    Mr. Bemused Senior

    @MomSense: What troubles me is that the Republican elected officials care so little for laws, ethics, morals, and norms. As soon as the Democrats become like them, even in one instance, every last drop of hope is lost.

    That is my worry too. The extreme example is Trump, who doesn’t care about any rules, never mind accepted norms or guide rails.

    We (Dems) need to uphold [insist on] due process and rule of law.

    ETA all the more so because Rs don’t.

  32. 32.

    WaterGirl

    @New Deal democrat: If it makes you feel any better, I had not read the previous thread when I put this up.

    So that was me saying I had changed my mind from yesterday, that I was wrong when I was disappointed, to say the least, that 25 Dems had voted against expulsion, and Rankin had the better argument.

    I can see how you could see that as a pronouncement that there is only one way to look at this – but only if you assume that I knew about the discussion on the previous thread – which I did not

    I saw that it had been over 3 hours since the last post, I thought we could use one, so I put this up.

  34. 34.

    mdblanche

    @Ken: “What part of ‘All these worlds are yours, except Europa. Attempt no landing there’ didn’t you understand?”

    “Hey, that was just the people on this list. The rest of us had nothing to do with it, we swear.”

  36. 36.

    Victor Matheson

    @JoyceH:@Parfigliano:

    I agree that it is really too bad that Franken isn’t in the Senate anymore. But he is also not indispensable. Tina Smith is also a great senator, and the signal the Dems set might have a tipped a number of close races in 2018 (although too bad it didn’t get the Dems just 10K more votes in FL.)

  37. 37.

    WaterGirl

    @Omnes Omnibus:

     I would say it should at least require results of an ethics investigation.

    Agree.  That’s where we went off the rails with Franken, in my opinion.  We can argue whether there was any there there, and I know which side I would be on, but I would rather bang my head against the wall, repeatedly, than have that discussion again.

    Let there be an investigation.

    However, didn’t the Rs all but dismantle the ethics committee when they assumed leadership of the House?  Have they reconstituted that committee, or made some other change to make it more than a shell of a committee again?

  39. 39.

    dirge

    @Geminid: This is not an argument over whether Representatives have to wait for a criminal conviction to expel a member.

    In fact, I don’t think anyone* is arguing that a conviction is prerequisite, including Raskin.  He says he’d also take the outcome of the House ethics process.  You can argue that Santos is so egregious that we can and should skip past any and all process, and I have some sympathy for that view, but I’d be really worried if there wasn’t pushback against it.

    * Unless I missed someone in the previous thread, or you count transparently disingenuous arguments from republicans.

  41. 41.

    MisterDancer

    @New Deal democrat: But now that a fron pager has decreed that the opposite is correct, I will bow out.

    First: A front pager’s already disagreed with you, unless John’s pulled my access. :)

    Second: In fact, it doesn’t matter what we want, or what Rankin wants. The Constitution says you, New Deal, wins — the House has a set process to expel that only involves voting, and there’s no override for that.

    So yeah, asking for the House to actually consider a conviction or appropriate committee referral seems a wonderful thing to ask for to mitigate that in our modern age, if for nothing else that the massive explosion in laws since the Constitution was written.

    Esp. when, as you look at the expulsion record in full, the vast majority of historical expulsion efforts connect on two points:

    1. Convicted of a crime, and/or
    2. In the last century, referral from the appropriate Ethics Committee (the Confederacy-aligned expulsion scan be sen to come from a similar effort)

    In that case, all people like Rankin are saying is, let’s hold to the historical standard.

  43. 43.

    Ruckus

    @hrprogressive:

    What makes you think this is any different than generations ago?

    Because it isn’t.

    Raskin makes the best and the legal argument. Basically we all know it’s true, but the proof isn’t out in the open, and to be proper it has to be out in the open and provable in a court of law. We shouldn’t want to be them, we must maintain the concept of law and that takes time and effort. It always has and it always will. And it’s the reason they don’t, because it takes time and effort, to enforce it and to follow it. That is the point of the law, that it applies to all of us and it is supposed to apply equally to all of us. Read about Britain right now and their politicians, getting caught with their genitalia in the cookie jar. Just like some of ours.

  49. 49.

    Alison Rose

    @Omnes Omnibus: She was responding to “But now that a front pager has decreed that the opposite is correct, I will bow out.” And noting that this is not what she was doing. I’m not seeing whatever it is you’re seeing that’s causing antagonism here

    ETA: Oh. It’s jokey time. Got it. Maybe a /s tag next time?

  53. 53.

    dmsilev

    @Ken:

    So if the Europans get mad because we landed on their moon, they’ll have my name?  No, thank you.

    ALL THESE WORLDS ARE YOURS EXCEPT EUROPA. ATTEMPT NO LANDING THERE.

  55. 55.

    Leto

    OT: Hate group reveals plan to overturn conversion therapy bans nationwide; The group wants to redefine “professional conduct” as “religious free speech.”

    The Christian anti-LGBTQ+ legal advocacy group Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) — defined as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center — is hoping the U.S. Supreme Court will overturn state bans on so-called conversion therapy for minors. Though the court hasn’t agreed to take on the case just yet, it provide insight into how ADF plans on challenging more conversion therapy bans in the future.

    The ADF is providing legal counsel to licensed marriage and family counselor Brian Tingley in Tingley v. Ferguson, a legal challenge to Washington state’s ban. Tingley says the ban violates his rights to free speech and free exercise of religion, The New Republic reported.

    Tingley’s petition to the court says that his speech as a therapist should be considered as “speech” and not professional “conduct.” He said he “lives in continuous fear of government persecution” because the ban “forbids him from speaking, treating his professional license as a license for government censorship.” Tingley says he should be able to offer conversion therapy — even though it has been widely disavowed as a form of psychological torture by numerous American mental health organizations — because some kids are actively seeking to change their sexual orientation.

    This is the same group that new speaker MAGAchud Johnson worked for as an attorney. Just can’t fucking hate them enough.

  57. 57.

    narya

    @Omnes Omnibus: And I think that Santos is trying to hang onto his seat so it becomes a bargaining chip, a la Agnew–I’ll resign if you drop the charges. While that might have been an option earlier in this thing, at this point I think it’s off the table–he’s in a world of hurt. They keep adding superseding indictments, and I don’t think they are just bouncing the rubble. At this point, if there’s someplace to which he can flee, I won’t be surprised if he does that.

  58. 58.

    dirge

    @WaterGirl: However, didn’t the Rs all but dismantle the ethics committee when they assumed leadership of the House?

    I believe they created a totally unreasonable deadline for hiring committee staff, and the concern was that it’d be hard to get much done without staff.  Not sure what the outcome was in the end.  But otherwise, I think the committee’s power is intact.

    Regardless, now would be a good time to push for the ethics committee to act with increased urgency, and to get them more resources if that’s needed.  That’d probably pass if you could get it to the floor, but Johnson will block it, so a it’s good wedge to drive into the republicans.  Make defending Santos into a full-time job.

  59. 59.

    BubbaDave

    @JoyceH: A lot of worse stories did drop — he groped multiple constituents during photo ops! The caucus was right to pressure him to resign, he was right to resign, and the contrast probably made the difference in Doug Jones’ first Senate race.

    Al Franken was smart and funny and eminently replaceable, as Tina Smith has shown. I don’t get why people are trying to make him into a martyr half a decade later.

  60. 60.

    dmsilev

    @Alison Rose: It’s a small chip; the names are etched using the same sort of techniques that go into making computer chips and the like. So, _small_ font.

    (I know a few JPL people, including some that have worked on Europa Clipper)

  61. 61.

    Prometheus Shrugged

    @Elizabelle: Agree in Santos’ specific case, but the 52nd district in California hasn’t learned this lesson. They elected Duncan Hunter AFTER he had been caught red-handed with campaign finance fraud and THEN elected Grand Theft Auto inspiration Darrell Issa to replace him.   Apparently, the real lesson is that for deep red districts, no amount of criming/corruption matters if the alternative is a smart young POC.

  63. 63.

    John S.

    @Carol:

    And the people trying to keep Trump off the ballot here in Colorado face the same problem.

    This is a completely different matter entirely. It may be inconvenient that the 14th amendment exists and literally has a clause which prohibits insurrectionists from holding elected office, but that’s in the Constitution.

    If we are to be a nation of laws, we don’t just get to pick and choose which parts we want to follow. The plaintiffs are right to bring these cases before the court and make them decide how the law should be interpreted.

  64. 64.

    prostratedragon

    Case of Rep. Adam Clayton Powell back in the 1960s. He was never indicted but there were some improprieties. A committee of the House recommended censure, but the full body refused to seat him. A very effective legislator for most of his career (quite unlike Santos, clearly), he won the special election to fill the seat, and also won a case the the Sopreme Court. Not impossible that Santos would not have won had he taken this pre-conviction expulsion to court.

  65. 65.

    Geminid

    @dmsilev: George Santos says he had no problems at all when NASA sent him to Europa. There was that problem on the way back when the meteor hit the spacecraft, but he’d brought along a roll of Flextape. A trick he learned in the French Foreign Legion.

  68. 68.

    UncleEbeneezer

    @BubbaDave: Franken is a hill that many people seem to forever want to die on.  Over and over.  It’s weird.  The Senate worked out fine.  He’s doing just fine.  No slippery slope that forces good Dem men, unfairly out of politics, ever came about.  On the list of politicians who got unfairly screwed, he’s pretty far down the list.  Hillary, Gore, and Kerry were done wrong MUCH worse and with far greater consequences for us and the world.

  69. 69.

    HumboldtBlue

    @New Deal democrat: ​ 

    It’s not about a front pager making the argument, in fact I linked to this story directly to Water Girl yesterday. It’s about a Dem lawmaker, in this case he also happens to be a lawyer, making the case to wait for jurisprudence and his reasoning is not only sound it’s the correct thing to do. If we are trying to salvage anything about the rule of law and its role in our political process, it’s worth another year of George Santos, his constituents are gonna remove regardless of what congress does.

  70. 70.

    Eunicecycle

    @Leto: these theocrats make me so tired. He can say whatever he wants but his professional license requires him to follow best practices with his patients. Is that so hard? Maybe we should low MDs to start doing bloodletting again.

  71. 71.

    tam1MI

    @BubbaDave: The other allegations were laughable on their face (“His hand landed on my roll of fat!”, “He looked like he was maybe kinda sorta thinking about kissing me!”), and the Doug Jones campaign had gone on record saying that the Al Franken kerfuffle had no effect whatsoever on their numbers – they were winning before the thing blew up and they were winning during and after.

    There is no need to ” make Al Franken a martyr”. The people who ran him out of the Senate on a rail did that. Everyone afterwards was just acknowledging that fact.

  75. 75.

    Ken

    Regarding le affaire Santos, a Jack E. Smith tweet in last night’s post said “They’re not even sure of his real name.” I’ve seen similar claims elsewhere. Is that true? If so, there could be issues of eligibility and/or legality of the election that might argue for immediate removal, without waiting for the ethics committee.

    It also opens up the possibility that they vote to eject George Santos, and he says “But my name is not George Santos, so this resolution has no effect….”

  77. 77.

    tam1MI

    @UncleEbeneezer: No slippery slope that forces good Dem men, unfairly out of politics, ever came about.

    No Dem men, yes, but Katie Hill got forced out of seat in the House because a bitter ex posted revenge porn of her.

    A Republican flipped the seat.

  78. 78.

    Omnes Omnibus

    @UncleEbeneezer: As I noted above, resignation is up to the individual member.  Franken chose to resign.  Whatever his reasoning was, it was his choice.  No one expelled him.  No one forced him out.  As far as I was concerned, that ended the matter.  I don’t know why it keeps coming up.

  79. 79.

    dmsilev

    @wjca: Was just going to link to that.

    Pros of Expelling George Santos

    • No longer would we be haunted by thoughts of the “2400 dogs and 280 cats” his campaign website claimed his charity had “effectively rescue[d].” (What does this mean? The numbers are oddly specific! And, frankly, I have never seen a sentence where the word “effectively” did not feel like “legally, this should be the word ‘not.’ ”)
    • His exit would give the spotlight back to the other Republicans in Congress!

    Cons of Expelling George Santos

    • His exit would give the spotlight back to the other Republicans in Congress!
    • It seems unfair to the man who invented the atomic bomb, according to his biopic, “Oppenheimer.”
    • This seems like a rude thing to do to our 16th president, the man who held the Union together during the Civil War.
    • He is best friends with all the kings of England, both past and present, and expelling him might upset diplomatic relations!
    • He is God’s favorite.
    • He killed the Philistine warrior Goliath with just a single stone from his slingshot.
  80. 80.

    Leto

    @prostratedragon:

    reading his wiki and man… that’s uh, quite the legacy to leave there. But this part at the end:

    Powell won the Special Election to fill the vacancy caused by his exclusion, receiving 86% of the vote.[37] But he did not take his seat, as he was filing a separate suit. He sued in Powell v. McCormack to retain his seat. In November 1968, Powell was re-elected. On January 3, 1969, he was seated as a member of the 91st Congress, but he was fined $25,000 and denied seniority.[38] In June 1969, in Powell v. McCormack, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the House had acted unconstitutionally when it excluded Powell, as he had been duly elected by his constituents.[39]

    Basically loops back around to Omnes point at #29.

  81. 81.

    Barney

    Santos already admitted to stealing from a shopkeeper in Brazil. He was fined a few thousand dollars. He got his due process (he chose that rather than having to return to Brazil to stand in court). Raskin is wrong; most of the Dem reps are right.

  82. 82.

    wjca

    @Alison Rose: I’m also…a tiny bit confused that there are 123 names from North Korea, because I would’ve imagined that NASA would be something the NK government would totally block from the citizens’ knowledge.

    Maybe just Kim Jong Un 123 times?

  83. 83.

    George

    @mdblanche:

     Thanks for reminding the collective that a two-thirds majority was needed to expel Santos, and that regardless of how the Democrats voted, there never would have been enough Republican votes to give him the boot.

  84. 84.

    dmsilev

    @wjca: More banal than that, I’m afraid. The sign-up form lets you pick your country. There’s probably just a hundred or so people who either mis-clicked or thought that it would be funny to claim to be from NK.

  85. 85.

    Geminid

     

     

    @John S.: People trying to disqualify Trump will have a much better chance if and when he’s convicted in the case Judge Chutkan will try next Spring. Then, Secretaries of State will have to decide if he qualifies for the ballot, and people can challenge their decisions in court.

    One complication: the Republican Party can’t try to put Trump on the ballot until he is nominated by the convention in Milwaukee. That will be when this question plays out, I think. I’m starting to think Trump’s VP pick will be important, because the RNC will likely make them their Presidential candidate if Trump is disqualified.

  86. 86.

    Leto

    @UncleEbeneezer: ​
    I see it as a cumulative effect, but do agree in general.

    @Eunicecycle: ​ I was wondering that myself, doesn’t his professional licensing take precedence? Or we at that stage where as long as you hate the same people then you’re unbound, and free to do anything you want?

  91. 91.

    Geminid

    @tam1MI: I do not think Katie Hill was forced out of her seat by other Democrats. She was in a bind, because California law allowed the Daily Mail and other media sites to keep posting the revenge porn as long as she was in public office. She resigned to stop them.

  93. 93.

    NotMax

    @Alison Rose

    There’s a phalanx of North Koreans proved skilled in computing and IT who are granted temporary leave to be outside the country (which includes nations other than China, mostly southeast Asian and Middle Eastern states).

  95. 95.

    jonas

    @Leto: Tingley says he should be able to offer conversion therapy — even though it has been widely disavowed as a form of psychological torture by numerous American mental health organizations — because some kids are actively seeking to change their sexual orientation.

    These are, of course, lies. No kids are actively seeking to change their sexual orientation. They’re being bullied and browbeaten by their homophobic families and churches to “do something” about their “sinful inclinations.” Just as doctors can’t knowingly prescribe you crystal therapy in lieu of chemotherapy for your cancer, these so-called therapists shouldn’t be able to offer people a phony cure for a non-existent problem and expect to keep their licenses.

  101. 101.

    prostratedragon

    @Leto:  Exactly. And the same constituency decided a year later to go in another direction, when Powell was defeated in the primary by Charles Rangel. The same is likely to happen to Santos, whose legacy will include, not major social legislation, but a motherlode of witty slung arrows.

  102. 102.

    Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony

    @Geminid:

    I’m starting to think Trump’s VP pick will be important, because the RNC will likely make them their Presidential candidate if Trump is disqualified.

    If it was Haley, I think many Trumpers would stay home. However, the business GOPers would line up for her.

  103. 103.

    Kay

    I initially thought Raskin Was Right but the BJ’ers have persuaded me and now Raskin Is Wrong.

    Santos is a side show, though. He doesn’t matter.

  104. 104.

    Kay

    If any of you like to make candy, these are incredibly delicious. Boil the cider all the way down, though, or it will fail.

    The recipe says cider will be”syrup” but it won’t be syrupy, just thicker than it was, so just boil it until it’s reduced to half a cup.

  105. 105.

    Sister Machine Gun of Quiet Harmony

    @Kay: I’m not persuaded that it matters whether Raskin is technically right or wrong. Any time we loudly proclaim we are doing something (different than the GOP) for law n order and due process, it helps undermine their narrative as the party of law n order. That is still a good thing. I also am pretty sure Santos will get primaried on the GOP side. Plus, we’ll hopefully put up a really good candidate on our side.

  108. 108.

    wjca

    @Ken: It also opens up the possibility that they vote to eject George Santos, and he says “But my name is not George Santos, so this resolution has no effect….”

    Except that “George Santos” is who was elected.  So if you’re not George Santos, then you’re gone.

  109. 109.

    prostratedragon

    @NotMax:  Surprised his name didn’t immediately ring a bell, since he had so many accomplishments and I was paying some attention at the time.

  111. 111.

    Miss Bianca

    @tam1MI: Cram it, clown. Franken had a reputation in the business that predated his Senate run. The fact that you don’t know that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. Also, too, your remarks about the women involved…Jesus. How to say “I’m a misogynistic pig” without saying “I’m a misogynistic pig”.

  112. 112.

    jackmac

    I’d love to see Santos exit Congress and spend his ample free time in New York courtrooms. Even that slimy shitwheel deserves due process, so I agree with Raskin.

    I just  wish former Minnesota Sen. Al Franken had been given the same consideration before he was railroaded out of the Senate.

  116. 116.

    unctuous

    @JoyceH: I am inclined to think there was much worse with Franken.

    We marvel at how stupid people like Trump and Santos were for stepping into the spotlight of public scrutiny. Both had pretty much gotten away with their crimes and frauds until they they drew attention to themselves.

    I think Franken was smarter. No shrinking violet, he resigned because was more out there, much more damning and actionable than fratboy hijinks-cum-sexual-harassment in the stress of a war zone.

    BTW, the work environment of those early years of Saturday Night Live was (and who knows, maybe still is) a cesspool of sexual harassment and sexual assault, exactly the years he was a writer and performer there. It was the culture of the time, the industry and especially that particular work environment, and he was in it.

  119. 119.

    jackmac

    @Omnes Omnibus:  From a Yahoo News article on July 23, 2019:

    “(A) New Yorker article reinforces a belief that Franken’s resignation was a mistake. The writer Jane Mayer said he was “railroaded.” Sen. Patrick Leahy called his decision to join the voices pushing out Franken “one of the biggest mistakes I’ve made.” The argument is that Democrats were overzealous in an attempt to be seen as having a “no tolerance” policy towards harassers. “Al deserved more of a process,” said Sen. Angus King.

    “Others contend that, even if the allegations are true, Franken’s misdeeds pale in severity when compared to the accusations against prominent Republicans like President Trump, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore. It’s unfair, they say, for Franken’s career to end when these men have been allowed to continue their political careers.”

  120. 120.

    MomSense

    @prostratedragon:

    I happened to canvas his daughter in 2008.  She showed me a letter that Senator Obama sent her about her dad and how much his legacy meant to him.  She was really sweet.

  122. 122.

    Omnes Omnibus

    Looks like we will still be arguing about Franken in 30 years.  I stand by what I said, but I have no interest in going back and forth on it any further.

  124. 124.

    Ruckus

    @HumboldtBlue:

    Not a problem.

    I’ve told this here before but I think it has value on many levels. Taking my draft physical shortly after turning 18, standing in line in my shorts and socks, holding the rest of my clothes and shoes in my arms with around 75-100 18 yr old guys at the Armed Forces Enlistment Station on one side of the main hallway and across that 12 or so feet was 75-100 fellas in line, being drafted that day. A marine drill instructor walks down the hall, creases in his pants and shirt that one could shave with and his smoky the bear hat, he tells the guys going in that day that he was going to count off and every third man move towards the wall. He counts, one, two, nice volume and tone and then THREE, STEP BACK. He goes down the line like this and then says “All you guys in the middle of the hallway, walk down to the 2 ladies in uniform, you are in the army today.” They do, they go in the room, the door is shut and he turns to those he told to step back, “In this room, You are MINE.” Every single man in that hallway other than that Marine DI was contemplating how shitty their lives looked that day. That was 56 years ago, it seems like yesterday, that’s how imprinted that is in my brain. I don’t have to imagine, having not much later been in the military back then with a lot of men around my age, having been in that building twice, I was not in any way alone that day in that hallway. Being drafted into the Army would have been bad enough, but being drafted into the Marines was a damn good way to die young back in the late 60s, early 70s.

  125. 125.

    JBWoodford

    @WaterGirl: Or “George Santos” as we know him is actually a host for a time-traveling Sam Beckett who hasn’t been able to leap out until he does something to resolve the plot.

  126. 126.

    sab

    @Kay: OMG that sounds delicious. And we only have about a month left that our local farmers market store is open with cider.

  127. 127.

    SalmonFly

    @Ruckus: People to whom I tell the story seem like, ‘yeah OK,’ but I will back you up on that. After going through the induction routine, we were sent into a room that had a bunch of those heavy, 6′ tables, and a lot of chairs. Sitting, I watched as an Army officer AND a Marine officer marched in; my heart went cold because I ‘knew’ what it meant. Only for us, then (1968), it was every other guy was a Marine. EVERY OTHER one! I didn’t know they could do that! I won the lottery that day when the Marine looped his finger over my head; for better or worse, it was the Army for me. I still clearly see the scene, and still smell my fear.

  129. 129.

    WaterGirl

    @SalmonFly: I can only imagine.  You were one of the lucky ones

    Also, welcome!  I had to manually approve your first comment, but going forward, your comments will show up for everyone right away.

  131. 131.

    Ruckus

    @SalmonFly:

    My year was 1967.  I know of others that had 50% days. 2 yrs later I enlisted in the navy for 4 yrs because I could not stand the pressure any longer, of coming home from work and seeing that envelope. I of course have no idea if it would have come or not, but the chance was just a tad too great for me.

  132. 132.

    Matt McIrvin

    @Mr. Bemused Senior: I think it’s interesting that movie YouTubers and such so often refer to “2010: The Year We Make Contact” (and/or Clarke’s novel, “2010: Odyssey Two”) as “the forgotten sequel”, yet nerdy online people quote a couple of lines from it all the time, making me think it wasn’t really that forgotten.

    (“My God, it’s full of stars” appears in Arthur C. Clarke’s novel of “2001”, but is not in the movie. But Clarke and Peter Hyams use the line really prominently in the sequel; I think it’s the first spoken line in the movie. And I think Hyams managed to convince some viewers that it had been in “2001” the movie.)

Comments are closed.