Raptorpat

If the Republican Congress were investigating a failed insurrection led by Democrat-oriented extremists based on a lie who stormed the Capitol, and the Democratic minority tried to appoint members who were (1) a material witness or (2) publicly announced their intent to use their appointment to muddy the water and change subjects from the politically motivated insurrection (for example, by focusing on an irrelevant comparison to racial injustice protests that weren't an attempted insurrection and storming of the US Capitol), after the Democratic minority successfully blocked bipartisan legislation to empanel an independent, bipartisan committee, maybe the Republican Speaker would be right to reject those appointments. Which again, rejecting two flawed candidates out of five appointees and asking for two alternates is different than saying "your party gets no representation at all in an insurrection investigation." McCarthy is the only reason that Cheney and Kinzinger are the GOP's only representation, and we'll see how the gamble plays out. P.S. There is no jurisprudence underlying this parenthetical, it's a completely unlitigated question that won't be answered by the courts before Gym Jordan runs out the clock.

I reject the underlying premise of this whataboutism. Three of the five picks were accepted just fine, and she asked for two alternates to replace them. The two that were rejected were rejected were too close intertwined with a literal insurrection investigation, one of which was since subpoenaed by said investigation. If literally being a relevant witness isn't good cause to be excluded from running the investigation, I don't know what is. This isn't a generic partisan probe to catch a secretary misappropriating funds on office furniture or boinking their assistant on said furniture, it is an investigation over a literal insurrection mob scaling walls and storming the capitol. Obviously when the House flips the new majority will pretend and use this commission ask an excuse to lower the bar of good faith even further for regular issues, but we don't have to pretend that's not what it is.

I log in via the Pokemon Trainer Club that just requires inputting an account name and password in PoGo. I didn't realize the other login types don't work like that.

I'm confused. If you know the email and you know the password, why can't you log in? I'm not asking to be a tool, I'm just confused.

It won't let you do what?

Why can't you log into the old pogo account and change the Gmail tied to it? I don't think you have to be logged into the email to log into the game.

you have no way of recovering the original account?

They all but admitted beforehand that their goal was to run defense and muddy the water. But Jordan, the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, and Banks, the head of the Republican Study Committee, have emerged as some of the most vocal Trump defenders in the wake of the insurrection, infuriating Democrats of all stripes who consider Trump’s allies to be complicit in the attack. Both Jordan and Banks have said in recent days that they were hoping to use their positions on the select committee to investigate what Pelosi knew about the security threat ahead of the violence. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/564122-pelosi-rejects-jordan-banks-for-jan-6-committee/ Is the working theory here that Dem leadership is at fault for not knowing or not recognizing that an actual lynch mob was going to literally try to kill them to prevent a peaceful transfer of power - rather than it being the fault of the maga mob and the maga people who incited it? Was it a "Palpatine kidnaps himself" 12-D chess level play? If belligerent Democrats mob the Capitol - scaling walls, breaking through windows, beating security, etc. - with the intent to hang the vice president, assassinate the opposition, and so on, hypothetical Democrat Gym Gordan probably shouldn't be on a commission to investigate them either.

Arkansas (pronounced "our-kansas")

Counterpoint is the despondency at how much control over their audience they have and how big that audience is. Never going to be one reality ever again.

Why?oming

nude jersey

Evidently their counter programming during the hearing was two hours (Carlson, Hannity) commercial-free. I wonder how much ad revenue that equals, to make sure there were no natural pauses to encourage viewers to flip over to the real thing.

This is false. The minority party provided five appointees, and two were rejected due to a direct conflict of interest (one of which was even subpoenaed by the commission), so the Minority Leader pulled the rest of his appointees and boycotted the commission out of partisan spite.

I had to step away in the middle, but I recall the documentary guy or someone basically testifying that some of those guys went out in advance of the speech ending to "secure" the route

Yeah, this is the opening hearing. They articulated what each of the individual hearings would focus on but I didn't note it. This one I believe is focus on the premeditated aspect.

they're about to show otherwise unseen video of jan 6

We went to the park, did a few of the nihilego raids and looked at some geese in the pond. It was no "every legendary in raids at once" but also we didn't buy tickets to the "real" event so I don't know what we're missing beyond shaymin.

can you please elaborate

happ birthday ninja_jesus!

what?

you might be surprised https://ballotpedia.org/States_with_initiative_or_referendum

That's why I specified states with ballot petitions, which override the people who would otherwise make those decisions in those states. The rest of us are riding the caboose though.

Even before that, there are things that should probably be done. Voting reform for one. Not just rules for voting but how voting works. Folks in states with public ballot propositions that can bypass their bipartisan legislatures should circulate petitions for ranked choice voting or other voting format reforms. Whether it's the Maine model or the Alaska model, anything is an improvement. That way the spoiler effect isn't a factor, the argument gets taken off the table entirely. There are also other issues, like the threshold for a party or candidate to get on the ballot, or what happens once a third party candidate is elected to a legislature (can they join a major party's conference, allowing them to participate in the process? or do they sit in the back by themselves and vote on the floor after the real process happens?). But I think voting reform is a good start.