This is turning out to be their next buttery males, which was their next Benghazi, which was their next Fast And Furious etc.
Anything to get out of actually acting in good faith and, you know, governing.
this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
71 points (97.3% liked)
politics
18986 readers
3870 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Desperate fascists are desperate.
That shouldn't even be legal.
It's the only "governing" they know and want to do.
Which is exactly why it shouldn't be legal.
Congress should not be allowed to vote for the same thing over and over.
You can't be tried for the same thing over and over again in different courts, much less the same one. The Double Jeopardy doctrine should apply to Congress as well.
At the very least, you should have to wait until the next session.
So you don't think they should be able to try to vote on Ukraine aid again since the vote failed in the House?
Would there be a point to it? Is it going to magically pass the house the next time this session somehow?
They have to try it today, the special election for Santos's seat is today. While the outcome is not certain, there is a snowstorm blowing through Long Island and all the MAGAs don't trust early voting so I think the Democrat may have an edge there. Assuming he wins, then Republicans will not have the votes to do it until the special election for McCarthy's seat next month (which ought to go Republican)
Republicans, conservatives, GOP, whatever you want to call them are a clear and present danger to our democracy. Eventually, I hope, we the people will act accordingly.
Republicans, conservatives, GOP, whatever you want to call them ...
Fascists.
Hold on, I fucked up. Do-over!
This is the best summary I could come up with:
House Republicans are eyeing a redo on impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas this week after the conference fell short of penalizing the embattled Cabinet head in a stunning — and embarrassing — fashion.
Back on the House side, lawmakers may consider legislation related to the nation’s warrantless surveillance powers this week after Congress approved a short-term extension of the authority last year.
And all eyes will be on New York’s 3rd Congressional District this week as voters head to the polls to select a successor to former Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), who was expelled from Congress last year.
Support for Kyiv has become a hot-button issue in the House GOP conference, with an increasing number of Republican lawmakers becoming skeptical of additional aid for the embattled U.S. ally.
The House may vote on legislation related to the U.S.’s warrantless surveillance powers this week, according to the schedule from Scalise’s office, bringing the hot-button issue back to the forefront after lawmakers failed to reach a consensus on reforms last year.
But if Suozzi wins his seat back, flipping the district from red to blue, the House split would be 219-213, meaning Republicans can only lose two of their own on party-line votes with full attendance and still get their efforts over the finish line.
The original article contains 1,393 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 85%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!