BC FOR LATER READ
Saved by @Alex1Powell

THREAD: a point worth addressing is "how would/should VP respond if GOP retained its majority, then voted to suspend/amend a Senate Rule depriving the presiding officer of power." Paragraph 6 of the article wasn't as strong as it could have been, on that point.

 The problem with that attack is encapsulated in the Senate's official history (cited graf 7) - https://t.co/UwF93b9YaA

The Senate's official history on its https://t.co/gLTPXi8eiT site recounts the Constitutional fact that the majority leader's presiding powers are derivative.
A power informally delegated by the VP can be taken back, so the Senate history accurately describes the majority leader as "an emperor without clothes." So, if the VP used presiding power to give priority to a senator moving a House-passed bill to the floor, and . . .
. . . the House purported to override that action by 1) self-recognizing the ML to do something different, and then 2) sustaining a point of order limiting the VP's presiding power, what would be the legal basis and remedy for that action?
Several principles intersect here that arise from agency rulemaking. But first, we have to recognize the Supremacy Clause - the Constitution is a superior law to any other law, rule or precedent.
The Senate Rules describe the powers of the Presiding Officer, and can be suspended or amended by the majority, but that action would not be valid if it deprived the VP of her constitutional presiding power. The Constitution is supreme over the rule, not the other way around.
Then, look at Senate Rules restricting the presiding power like other rulemaking - it must be within the scope of statutory (or, here, constitutional) authorization. The Constitution endows Senate with power to "chuse its other officers" BUT not the presiding officer.
Only a Constitutional amendment could divest the VP. So to the extent Senate Rules were applied to do so, it would violate Art. 1 Sec. 3 and the Supremacy Clause.

And then, return to the idea that the majority leader's presiding power is derivative/delegated by the VP . . .
. . . or, a glass cannot be smaller than the water poured from it. If the Senate limited the presiding officer's powers, those limitations must apply to the majority leader and VP equally, or conversely would be an unconstitutional limitation of the VP's presiding power.
We have precedent in the agency context, analyzing whether a rulemaking exceeds statutory authority. The Constitution being the supreme statute under its own Supremacy Clause, rulemaking that made the derivative ML power larger than VP's power would violate those precedents.
How would that play out? If VP recognized a Senator to move a bill, and Mitch tried to stop her? A floor fight on this topic COULD generate a Supreme Court petition, and in this hypothetical, VP would have standing to petition, and I believe the court would hear it. . . .
. . . and resolve in her favor. Would that take more than a minute? Sure? Is it worth teeing up and doing? Good God, there are hundreds of House-passed bills that would save and improve American lives.
Many have wide popular support and would draw enough GOP votes to pass the Senate, or cause the rejecting Senators to lose their seats if their votes were on record. Sure, it's worth doing. And even the possibility of divesting the ML's power, seriously posed, could deter abuse.
Another point was raised - didn't the early Senate successfully rebel against the VP's presiding powers? Such data prior to Marbury v. Madison isn't relevant to the framework here, because at that time, SCOTUS did not assert jurisdiction to review laws or rulemaking.
I hope this is helpful, and I am still happy to address any "debunking" if it is cited. Several have said "but this was already debunked," but thus far no one has presented that putative "debunking" to me for review.
My head was seemingly doing this constitutional/rulemaking analysis when I wrote the article,but I failed to fully unpack and explain it. Always a mistake, whether for judges or the public! So consider this thread my reply brief, if you will.

More from For later read

Emily\u2661
Emily♡
@ItsEmilyKaty
To the person who thinks that they might be autistic. - a thread. /1

I imagine you have gone your entire life wondering why you are different, why you can't seem to understand things the way that others can and why everything just seems so hard. I'm proud of you for getting this far. /2

Part of you might be thinking:
"But if I was autistic, surely it would've been noticed when I was a kid? So maybe I'm making this up."
So many autistic people aren't diagnosed until they are adults, if diagnosed at all. You would not be the first and you won't be the last. /3

"My family and friends don't think that I could be autistic."
People's understandings of autism tend to be based off of the media, which doesn't show every possible presentation of autism, or based off of someone they know, and all autistic people present differently. /4

People's perceptions of autism can also be based off stereotypes, for example, "autistic people can't make eye contact, so you can't be autistic." While this is true for some, it isn't for all, so you can begin to see how one presentation of autism can't possibly fit everyone. /5
FOR LATER READ , ALL
Melissa J. Hogan
Melissa J. Hogan
@melissajhogan
🧵 @DianeLangberg wrote about NDAs in Christian environments, noting “An NDA is an agreement to hide something. In the cases I have encountered it has always been an agreement to exercise power over and hide sin.... [it is] unlike our Lord.”
1/

NDAs are traditionally “non-disclosure” - don’t talk about specific X. Often in church/ministry cases - they’re overly broad - don’t talk abt *anything* re: your employment

but also may include

“non-disparagement” - don’t say anything negative about us EVEN IF IT IS TRUE
2/

Numerous articles have described the use of NDAs in Christian environments and the conflict with principles described in the very faith supposedly being promoted. I’m linking them here then I’ll offer my 20-year lawyer and victim of silencing (gag order) take on the practice.
3/

“Silence of the sheep” (2018) from @emlybelz described how the conference of catholic bishops has now banned NDAs in abuse cases but how some churches and Christian orgs still use them without

Later in 2018, @scotmcknight discussed NDAs after the Bill Hybels sex abuse scandal, noting that often the stronger party is implicated in sin because the whole reason for the NDA is bc they know that something is wrong and they don’t want it
FOR LATER READ
Advertisement
IAM...BROWNING
IAM...BROWNING
@VVission123
You wanna know the real reason WHY the "Old Guard" (Evil Powers that once ruled this world) wanted all of you dumbed down?
Your brains are supposed to work like mine does. You All are supposed to be able to see into the future etc. They poison all of you with foods that keep

you asleep.
Certain Daily products that all of you use like toothpaste,Deodorant,soaps etc do harm to you without you even knowing that harm is being done. Those who don't know these things are just so used to being the way they are and think it's all "Normal" when it's really

not. Your minds are designed for so much more and they know/knew this. THEY want all of you dumbed to so you just fall in line to what they say. They want you to follow all the latest Trends, They want you to follow the "Stars". Most of the stars advertise products but I

guarantee you that they themselves don't use 90% of what they are advertising on the market today.
They are being used as puppets, thinking all of you will just follow them blindly falling into all the traps they have had set out for you ALL THESE YEARS..

Look at Portland for

example, They are legalizing all recreational drugs. Allowing Young adults who's brains aren't fully developed to just poison themselves. What happens in 5-10-15 years from now? Our entire youth is poisoned more than they already are? All our adults that the children look up too
FOR LATER READ
Heather Griffin
Heather Griffin
@MargeNAlia
Part of what is going on here is that large sectors of evangelicalism are poorly equipped to help people deal with basic struggles, let alone the ubiquitous pornography addictions that most of their men have been enslaved to for years.


On the one hand, there's a high standard of holiness. On the other hand, there's a model of growth that is basically "Try Harder to Mean it More." Identify the relevant scriptural truth & believe it with all of your sincerity so that you may access the Holy Spirit's help to obey.

Helping sincere believers believe and obey the Bible facts is pretty much all the Holy Spirit does these days, other than convict us of our sins in light of the Bible facts.

If you know you are sincere and hate your sin and believe the right Bible facts as hard as you can but continue to be enslaved to your pornography addiction, what else left for you to do? Just Really, Just Really, Just Really Trust God and Give it to Him?

To suggest that there are other strategies available sounds to those formed in this model of growth like one is also suggesting that the Bible is insufficient, but it also suggests something just as threatening- that there are aspects of reality that are not immediately apparent.
FOR LATER READ
Elbridge Colby
Elbridge Colby
@ElbridgeColby
There is some valuable analysis in this report, but on the defense front this report is deeply flawed. There are other sections of value in report but, candidly, I don't think it helps us think through critical question of Taiwan defense issues in clear & well-grounded way. 1/


Normally as it might seem churlish to be so critical, but @cfr is so high-profile & the co-authors so distinguished I think it’s key to be clear. If not, people - including in Beijing - could get the wrong idea & this report could do real harm if influential on defense issues. 2/

BLUF: The defense discussion in this report does not engage at the depth needed to add to this critical debate. Accordingly conclusions in report are ill-founded - & in key parts harmful/misleading, esp that US shldnt be prepared defend Taiwan directly (alongside own efforts). 3/

The root of the problem is that report doesn't engage w the real debate on TWN defense issues or, frankly, the facts as knowable in public. Perhaps the most direct proof of this: The citations. There is nothing in the citations to @DeptofDefense China Military Power Report...4/

Nor to vast majority of leading informed sources on this like Ochmanek, the @RANDCorporation Scorecard, @CNAS, etc. This is esp salient b/c co-authors by their own admission have v little insight into contemporary military issues. & both last served in govt in Bush 43. 5/
FOR LATER READ

You May Also Like

Sara Benincasa
Sara Benincasa
@SaraJBenincasa
Spent a quaint half hour in a cafe listening to a guy yell at his dad after his dad said that the women Trump molested wanted it: "Dad, that's like saying the Jews who died in the Holocaust were asking for it!" ENJOY YOUR TERRIBLE FAMILIES THIS WEEK!

"Mom, has a man ever touched you without your consent?"
"Of course."
"Did you report it?"
"No."
"Dad, your WIFE has been through this!"

Dad was unmoved and told the guy to stop arguing with him.

At this point we learned the boy child has allergies.

I forgot to remark upon the presence of the very cute grandson, who was very small and gave not one shit about the yelling. I believe a sister or aunt was present and feeling very stressed. I wanted to hand her a Xanax or seven.

It was really hard to not jump in and say, "Sounds like you guys are going to have a fun meal tomorrow!" so they could unite in hatred against me, the outsider, and stop squabbling. Instead I exchanged glances with a nearby fellow lady patron, who also emotionally ate a cookie.

Anyway, I want to thank the random family for yelling about rape and the Holocaust in an Israeli cafe in the US of A today because it reminded me that while this country isn't the greatest, it is inevitably my stupid favorite and I am never, ever bored.
SOCIETY
Anu Satheesh
Anu Satheesh
@AnuSatheesh5
Importance of Famous Payyannur Pavithra Mothiram or Ring

Payyanur Sri Subramanya Swami Temple 🚩
Kerala

Temple, constructed by Parasurama is known as the 'Pazhani' of Kerala.The place got its name from 'Payyante Ooru' where Payyan is another name by which Subramanya was called.


There are references about this temple in Brahmanda purana. Muni Garga mentions this temple and the place to  the Pandavas when they were in Vanavasa. Temple was destroyed two times, once due to fire and then during the attack of Tipu Sultan.


Important tradition here is wearing of Pavithram by the temple priest. Pavithram is a sort of  ring worn during performing Vedic rituals or during the "pithrubali". Usually worn while performing Tarpana or Shradham. The traditional Pavitram is usually made of Dharbha grass
ALL
Advertisement
Jaya_Upadhyaya
Jaya_Upadhyaya
@Jayalko1
SRI BANKEY BIHARI JI, VRINDAVAN (UP)

Very famous Krishna Mandir where Bankey Bihari Ji is worshipped and looked after as a child.
Bankey means “Bent at three places”.
Thakur Ji was worshipped in Nidhivan till 1863. This mandir was constructed in 1864 by Goswamis.
@LostTemple7


Legend says that Swami Haridas used to worship Krishna in Nidhivan.
Once, his curious disciples entered the forest but they were almost blinded by bright, intense light. Upon knowing this, Swamiji himself went there and after his requests, Krishna appeared with his consort.


Krishna, then, left back this black charming murti,which we see now, before disappearing.
A curtain is drawn before the murti after every 15-30 second. It is said that if one stares long enough into the eyes of Shri Banke Bihari, the person would lose his self consciousness.


Bankey Bihari Ji sports a flute only once a year on the eve of Sharad Purnima.
Darshan of His lotus feet can be done only on Akshay Tritiya every year.
There are no loud bells here and
no early morning Darshan can be done so that child Krishna’s sleep is not disturbed.
ALL
Quinn Cummings
Quinn Cummings
@quinncy
Gather round, Gentle Readers. It is time I tell the story of the worst decision I ever made in an office. Some of you have heard this. Some have not. Whatever you do in your office today, this week, the rest of this year, you can console yourself by recalling this tale.

A long time ago, I was a talent agent. I worked for a woman named Susan Smith, who had her own small boutique agency. She was known for three things:

1. She had fantastic taste in clients. If there is someone you admire, odds are good that at some point, she was their agent,

2. She could negotiate a deal like few who have ever trod the earth. Casting would give her all the money they had budgeted for that part, plus a little more, plus promising to get her dog Barnaby groomed. She was magnificent to watch.

3. She was insane.

I'm sure you're thinking, "Quinn, it's the entertainment industry, they are all insane." Yes, many are. So consider this; if you told someone you worked for Susan, people who worked for insane people would look and you and whisper, "I hear she's insane."
LIFE
Tom Hirst
Tom Hirst
@tom_hirst
How to create a freelancing website that makes money.

Everything I've learned.

A thread.

As a freelancer,

Your website is everything.

First, prioritise its existence.

Second, prioritise its improvement.

The technology you use is irrelevant.

- WordPress
- Notion
- Carrd
- Wix

It doesn't matter which you choose,

What matters is you have a website.

Pick a platform that you're comfortable with.

If you can:

- Capture leads
- Add content easily
- Have a clear design

You're good.

If your website doesn't get leads,

It's not working.

Don't rest on a website that doesn't work for you.

Improve it until it does.
STARTUPS