1) Washington is staring at the potential of a government shutdown Monday night. This is grim. Congress has approved four temporary spending bills since the end of the government’s fiscal year in September to prevent a shutdown.

2) The most recent stopgap measure was a seven day plan this week. Mbrs knew that the COVID/coronavirus bill was so large, it would take several days to send to the White House. Yes, that bill funds the government until next fall. But it isn’t law until the President signs it.
3) So, the most recent Band-Aid measure was the equivalent of fiscal grout. The House will approve another emergency measure on Monday. But there's doubt the Senate will do anything before then. And, it’s unclear if President Trump would sign anything. That means a shutdown.
4) A shutdown is always dangerous. It could be more dangerous during a pandemic. And it’s unclear if a shutdown could have devastating impacts on distributing the vaccine.
5) It takes a two-thirds vote of both the House and Senate to override a presidential veto. With 359 House yeas and 92 Senate yeas on the COVID/omnibus bill, both bodies have way more than a supermajority to override a presidential veto.
6) But note that President Trump didn’t directly threaten to veto the coronavirus/omnibus bill. He didn’t have to. The President could prevent the package from becoming law, via a “pocket veto.”
7) Pocket vetoes are very rare. And you won’t find the term in the Constitution. Congress must find itself in the proper parliamentary posture for this possibility to be in play. But we could very well be in those circumstances now.
8) Article I, Section 7 of the Constitution says the President has ten days (Sundays excluded) to either sign or veto a bill. Otherwise, the bill magically becomes law, sans signature. The COVID/omnibus bill is still not at the White House.
9) Here’s where the pocket veto comes into play:

The latest the current Congressional session can end is 11:59:59 am on January 3.
10) That is the drop-dead time for the 116th Congress. A President may in effect “veto” a bill by keeping it in his “pocket” and not signing it if Congress passes it too close to a Congressional adjournment.
11) Under the Constitution, the new Congress must begin at noon et on January 3.

In other words, Congress needed to get the President the bill by December 23 to avoid a pocket veto. That’s the “ten-day/Sundays excluded” window.
12) That would force the President to either sign or veto the bill. And, if he vetoed it, Congress could try to override.

But Congress adjourning within that “ten day/Sundays excluded” window effectively neuters the possibility of an override attempt.
13) The President gets the bill and holds onto it. He can run out the clock on the Congressional session, blocking any potential override attempt. The bill just goes poof. It does not carry over into the 117th Congress.
14) If President Trump neither signs nor vetoes the coronavirus/spending bill at this stage, it’s like it never happened.

It’s unclear if the President’s proposed changes to the bill could pass. And, don’t forget that Congress has some responsibility in all of this, too.
15) Congress thought it had a deal with President Trump in 2018 to avoid a shutdown. It didn’t. Perhaps wiser heads should have anticipated the pocket veto scenario. Congress dithered well into December, trying to secure a final COVID package.
16) An earlier resolution would have given Congress recourse via a veto override. Now, there’s none.
17) This may be one of the worst Christmas scenarios to ever unfold on Capitol Hill. And there have been some doozies. A Senate vote on Obamacare on Christmas Eve morning in 2009.
18) The House impeached President Clinton just days before Christmas in 1998. The House reprised that performance days before Christmas in 2019. We’ve had Congress return to session between Christmas and New Year’s.
19) December is always a torrent of action in Congress. It’s nothing but late-night negotiations, weekend sessions and chaos. But this year's fury may have ultimately produced nothing at a time of crisis.

More from Chad Pergram

More from Government

Canada is failing to act on Climate Change. @wef @WorldBank @IMFNews @IPCC_CH @UNDPGAIN @AntiCorruptIntl @Pontifex @JustinWelby @OCCRP @StopCorpAbuse @TaxJusticeNet @FairTaxCanada @ecojustice_ca @WCELaw @CanEnvLawAssn @envirodefence @IBA_Canada #cdnpoli


Covid recovery money is going to the oligarchy.

Ottawa and the provinces have put very little on the table to help clean-tech companies directly during Covid 19 while targeting fossil-fuel producers with more than $16 billion in aid.

Coast to coast people have demanded treaties be honored. We demanded climate action, divestment and land back but Canada is not listening. This video shows 10 years of rallies in Waterloo Ontario. City & regional council declared a climate emergency. 🚨

The Bank of China (BOC), SNC-Lavalin and WE Charity were recipients of taxpayer-funded the Covid 19 Canadian Emergency Wage Subsidy (CEWS)
Long thread: Because I couldn’t find anything comprehensive, I’m just going to post everything I’ve seen in the news/Twitter about Trump’s activities related to the Jan 6th insurrection. I think the timing & context of his actions/inactions will matter a lot for a senate trial.

12/12: The earlier DC protest over the electoral college vote during clearly inspired Jan 6th. On Dec 12th, he tweeted: “Wow! Thousands of people forming in Washington (D.C.) for Stop the Steal. Didn’t know about this, but I’ll be seeing them! #MAGA.”


12/19: Trump announces the Jan. 6th event by tweeting, “Big protest in D.C. on January 6th. Be there, will be wild!” Immediately, insurrectionists begin to discuss the “Wild Protest.” Just 2 days later, this UK political analyst predicts the violence


12/26-27: Trump announces his participation on Twitter. On Dec. 29, the FBI sends out a nationwide bulletin warning legislatures about attacks https://t.co/Lgl4yk5aO1


1/1: Trump tweets the time of his protest. Then he retweets “The calvary is coming” on Jan. 6!” Sounds like a war? About this time, the FBI begins visiting right wing extremists to tell them not to go--does the FBI tell the president? https://t.co/3OxnB2AHdr
I don't normally do threads like this but I did want to provide some deeper thoughts on the below and why having a video game based on a real world war crime from the same people that received CIA funding isn't the best idea.

This will go pretty in depth FYI.


The core reason why I'm doing this thread is because:

1. It's clear the developers are marketing the game a certain way.

2. This is based on something that actually happened, a war crime no less. I don't have issues with shooter games in general ofc.

Firstly, It's important to acknowledge that the Iraq war was an illegal war, based on lies, a desire for regime change and control of resources in the region.

These were lies that people believed and still believe to this day.

It's also important to mention that the action taken by these aggressors is the reason there was a battle in Fallujah in the first place. People became resistance fighters because they were left with nothing but death and destruction all around them after the illegal invasion.

This is where one of the first red flags comes up.

The game is very much from an American point of view, as shown in the description.

When it mentions Iraqi civilians, it doesn't talk about them as victims, but mentions them as being pro US, fighting alongside them.

You May Also Like

The YouTube algorithm that I helped build in 2011 still recommends the flat earth theory by the *hundreds of millions*. This investigation by @RawStory shows some of the real-life consequences of this badly designed AI.


This spring at SxSW, @SusanWojcicki promised "Wikipedia snippets" on debated videos. But they didn't put them on flat earth videos, and instead @YouTube is promoting merchandising such as "NASA lies - Never Trust a Snake". 2/


A few example of flat earth videos that were promoted by YouTube #today:
https://t.co/TumQiX2tlj 3/

https://t.co/uAORIJ5BYX 4/

https://t.co/yOGZ0pLfHG 5/