mls1776.bsky.social
Former congressional lawyer
363 posts
5,500 followers
56 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
In case @americalabs.org knows or wants to build something.
comment in response to
post
Appointments 🎅
comment in response to
post
They have to make sure the embryos don’t jump bail
comment in response to
post
Sorry this remake doesn’t compare with the original
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw7P...
comment in response to
post
That was exactly what I was going to ask
comment in response to
post
Anna- don’t fall for this obvious attempt to distract you from finding the true Acting Administrator of DOGE.
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
ICE is becoming the secret police of this administration
comment in response to
post
How about “Elon’s getting out of DOGE“?
comment in response to
post
Eric
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
comment in response to
post
In fairness, wordplay is only off by one letter
comment in response to
post
Notwithstanding disputes about what he actually said (I didn’t listen), it seems pretty clear he didn’t mean to say we should be spreading democracy at the point of a gun.
comment in response to
post
Medicare or Medicaid?
comment in response to
post
Fair point. OTOH Rand Paul also condemned it.
comment in response to
post
That’s why they fired all the ethics officials. Problem solved.
comment in response to
post
Attorney General Blondi- one day she’s gonna gitcha 🎶
comment in response to
post
Maybe Qatar will pay for it.
comment in response to
post
To cover the screams of the people he is chopping up?
I’m just spitballing.
comment in response to
post
I would note that the Library of Congress is funded as part of the leg branch appropriations bill. Also in Webster v. Sun Company the DC district court treated CRS as legislative aides for purposes of common law privilege and Speech or Debate analysis.
That's all 10 minutes of research uncovered.
comment in response to
post
Not a dumb question. My understanding is that she is so considered (certainly CRS is). But whether that is legally correct or an open question, I don’t know.
comment in response to
post
Isn’t the question whether the president has constitutional authority to fire a legislative officer? Maybe the statute would be interpreted to give him that authority unless it is expressly limited. But it isn’t obvious that’s the case.
comment in response to
post
The Supreme Court checks the excesses of the president and then he sends Seal Team 6 to kill them. Just as the framers intended.
comment in response to
post
I read like 3-4 paragraphs before I realized this was from 2017
comment in response to
post
Deschler's house (should have a plaque or something)
comment in response to
post
Seems like a smoot point
comment in response to
post
Maybe we can just program a chatbot to be Robert Byrd and all our problems are solved.
comment in response to
post
Not necessarily. Constitutional amendments can be useful as an organizing tool and because the locus of power in the amendment process is legislative rather than judicial or executive.
comment in response to
post
We’re talking about the man who proposed turning Gaza into a hotel and resort?
comment in response to
post
At this point being locked up in Alcatraz is starting to look like one of the better options.
comment in response to
post
Heh
comment in response to
post
This will require me to remember who Brad Karp is, but I’ll give it a shot.
comment in response to
post
Dewey Cheatum & Kowtow
comment in response to
post
At least there are probably a lot of giant mirrors that he will constantly be forced to look into.
comment in response to
post
www.pointoforder.com/2025/04/30/i...
comment in response to
post
Today bills can effectively pass only with the president’s support (because 2/3 in both houses to override is almost never possible). This would effectively reduce override to 3/5, but would encourage building broader consensus beforehand. You could still pass w/ bare majority if POTUS supports.
comment in response to
post
But this would give the president significantly less power than he has now.
comment in response to
post
I guess that’s the DOJ version of “you can’t quit, you’re fired!”
comment in response to
post
Bessent et al seem to be saying simultaneously that the US economy has been grievously weakened by loss of manufacturing capability and that we have the economic strength to dictate terms to China and other nations. Seems like some cognitive dissonance.
comment in response to
post
Bills that pass with 3/5 majority are not subject to veto. Bills that pass with lesser majorities subject to absolute veto (ie, cannot be overridden).
comment in response to
post
So one pill could kill more than five people? 🤔
comment in response to
post
Why do I have the feeling that anyone could contact a government agency, claim to be from DOGE, and like shut down the Fish and Wildlife Service or something?
comment in response to
post
I assumed there was no security with her because otherwise it seems like an obvious question.