1) Several big, controversial things coming together in the House of Representatives this week.

The House is expected to vote mid-week to fine members who decline to pass through metal detectors en route to the House floor.

1) A LOT of balls in the air today on Capitol Hill, as is per usual here in December.

The House is expected to vote on a short-term spending bill today to avoid a government shutdown this weekend. Remember, this was supposed to be the easy part of the puzzle.

2) There are dozens of unresolved issues. So the new deadline for government funding will be 11:59:59 pm on December 18.

It’s possible the Senate could take up the stopgap funding bill today. But unclear. That may have to wait until tomorrow.

3) The Senate could also vote today to align with the House and pass the final version of the defense bill. But that could wait until tomorrow or even next week.

A veto override fight is brewing on this with President Trump.

4) The House scored WELL above the two-thirds necessary to override Mr. Trump’s threatened veto. In fact, the vote total last night went well above what the House had to approve the initial version of the legislation in the summer.

5) Based on the Senate’s vote total on the original version (86 yeas), senators should have the necessary votes to sync with the House and override the President later this month.

Congress has never overriden one of President Trump’s eight vetoes.

1) Urgent: the $2,000 stimulus check bill & veto override effort on the defense bill

The House of Representatives meets today in a rare session between Christmas and New Year’s. Two things on the docket today.

2) A bill to authorize $2,000 direct payment checks, in accordance with the President’s push last week and an override attempt of the annual defense bill.

We don’t expect any action in the House until the late afternoon and no votes before 5 pm et.

3) First up, the House debates the bill to provide $2,000 direct payment checks. The House will treat this bill as a “suspension” measure. That means they can rush it to the floor. But the trade off is a 2/3 vote for passage.

4) Note that many Republicans opposed such a plan for direct payments. Fox is told by a member of the GOP leadership that the House will likely get the 2/3 vote necessary for passage.

5) Watch to see how many Republicans, who were against additional direct payments, will now support the President on this issue.

Also in the queue is a vote to override the President’s veto of the annual defense bill. That will entail a debate and then a vote.

1) The Hitchhiker's Guide to a 2nd impeachment of President Trump: The House can impeach someone twice. And the Senate can even launch an impeachment trial after the President vacates his office.

1) The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Starting an Impeachment Trial

2) It is unclear when and how the Senate may begin President Trump’s second impeachment trial. The problem with “starting” an impeachment trial is that once you start, under the Senate impeachment rules, it can potentially supersede all other Senate action.

3) That’s the case - UNLESS - the Senate works out some sort of an agreement on handling an impeachment trial. Otherwise, once you start an impeachment trial, without a side agreement, the Senate meets six days a week at 1 pm et, Sundays excluded, until the trial is finished.

4) The key is when the House sends over the article of impeachment. That triggers a lot of things.

First things first. The Senate must send a parliamentary message to the House that it’s ready to “receive” the article.

5) This is kind of like a football referee waving his hand at a kickoff returner stationed in the end zone to make sure he’s ready to proceed with the kickoff. Once the Senate does that, the House can send the articles.

But…

A) This is “Capitol Crunch.” Congress often faces an avalanche of activity in December as lawmakers try to wrap up for the year. And the challenges this year are particularly acute.

B) Talks go on behind the scenes about a potential coronavirus relief package. We truly don’t know the size of the final product. But we keep hearing that the bipartisan “baseline” will be a little more than $900 billion.

C) But there are still major sticking points over liability protections and money for state and local governments.

D) It appears that the only way to advance any sort of coronavirus bill will be to latch it to the big, $1.4 trillion, omnibus spending bill which leaders and appropriators have been working on for weeks. But that’s far from settled, too.

E) Issues still remain regarding migrant detention policy and money for the wall.

Frankly, it’s going to take until at least early next week to get a coronavirus bill which can jell – let alone, the bill to avoid a government shutdown at 11:59:59 pm et on December 11.

It's funny how so many people who claim to worship "democracy" also dismiss nationalism as selfish xenophobia. Democracy is absolutely meaningless without strong national sovereignty. Under globalism, citizens of any given state have little influence over how they are governed.

Nationalism isn't just mindless tribalism. People are correct to insist their government has a responsibility TO THEM that vastly outweighs any imagined responsibility to foreign governments they have absolutely no influence over, or foreign populations.

We've seen that point taken to absurd extremes by the Left during the Trump administration, with whack-job judges ruling that foreigners have rights that EXCEED those of American citizens, including absolute rights to enter the U.S. and influence its government.

And we're frequently told that some international elite "consensus" completely overrides our ability to make individual decisions - or even to petition our own government, or vote for representatives who disagree with whatever "the world" has supposedly decided.

All of that is the absolute negation of "democracy" in any form, including the dangerous mob rule and majoritarianism that the Left selectively advocates. (Notice they always have a list of things nobody gets to vote on anymore, no matter how strong the majority vote would be.)

My little Jacob Wohl story: August 2016, we're sitting around the trading turrets at my office on a bored to tears slow day. Our receptionist said someone was here for his 2pm appointment. None of us had an appointment on schedule. Who is it? we ask? Some guy named Jacob Wohl 1/

Jacob Wohl, for those out of loop, gained quite a bit of notoriety for becoming the youngest guy to ever get himself barred for life from the financial industry. Now he's waiting in our lobby to pitch something. We're a large merchant bank. 2/

Send him in, we said. In walks young Jacob asking to be seeded with $25mm to start a new hedge fund in exchange for an ownership stake in it. Oh, & he needs an office. And a Bloomberg station. And needs to borrow staff until he can hire some guys. And he needs a leased car... 3/

And he needs an answer today. Right now. Because there's a competing offer from Izzy Englander's firm Millenium (we know those guys well). We fight the urge to literally start laughing, but do ask him...hey, you the same guy who got banned by regulators? He didn't even flinch 4/

He went on about that being untrue & handed over a letter he said was from his lawyer who had confirmed he was not barred, had been vindicated but it 'just wasn't in the system yet at the SEC, CFTC'...whatever that means. 5/

1/14 How do e-cigarettes (ECs) affect cigarette smoking among youth? My new paper with @FloeFoxon simulates each scenario and finds out which one best matches actual trends... https://t.co/dBB7kcnTls @jgitchell @mikepesko @SwitchFinder @jkelovuori @TobPolicy @Clive_Bates

2/14 First, let's talk about why this question is so difficult to answer: COUNTERFACTUALS. We can't know the alternate-reality answers, like which smokers would have never started in a world without ECs, and which nonsmokers would now be smoking without ECs as an option.

3/14 So, the best we can do is use fancy/sophisticated methodologies to estimate what would have happened to youth smoking rates in the absence of ECs. In our case, simulation modeling

4/14 First, we look at the declining smoking trends *that were already happening* before ECs came (~2010), and project them into the present. This is our BASE-CASE SCENARIO about what smoking trends would be if ECs were never invented. Actual trends were LOWER than this base-case

5/14 Side note about terminology: We use the term “catalyst” instead of “gateway,” because “catalyst” is more precise about the claim we are modeling (that ECs are used first, and then causally lead to smoking). Whereas "gateway" can include other mechanisms like renormalization.

MY RACIST

If U remember from an earlier post I brought up Sen Elizabeth Warrens remark that "Obama did more for Wall Street than Main Street." I concur. U can ignore poor black people all day, but under no circumstance can U ever ignore poor white

Now Biden must be careful not to repeat the same mistakes of Obama. Biden most go big & go big fast. Fuck inflation. Order the treasury to start printing money. You will not beat Trump by impeaching or prosecuting him. You must beat him on the battlefield of ideas & you do so by-

helping the people he ignored. People with good jobs, food on the table & a roof over their head dont have time to do insurrections. If U help these people, you will choke off the fuel to Trumpism. Some black people will criticize me for taking this approach. My simple retort is-

you can't out-violence white people. We don't make guns. We don't make bombs. We don't make shit. You have to make it such that everyone eats. Otherwise you have to deal with the warning Heather McGhee lays out in her new book: white

Obama did not get this. He made it such that only rich white oligarchs got to feast. Everyone else got crumbs. I need you to get precisely what peace requires. There are a good number of white people in this country which would rather burn this country down than to allow any-