Seriously people. Executive orders mean exactly nothing to what Trump legally can or can't do to fuck with the election results (which is zero). Stop letting idiots make you crazy

Goddamn it, Texas, I don't have time for this today.

Fine. Fine. A brief thread. (Yesterday I said I'd do a brief thread on the Michigan decision and finished an hour and a half later. Can't let this be that, today).

OK. Texas filed a motion for leave to file a complaint against PA, GA, MI and WI in the Supreme Court. Someone else can lawsplain to you how that works, or you can google the highlighted rules, but briefly, this is a thing they can theoretically do

There is a MASSIVE contradiction at the heart of this complaint, and its doomed for other reasons, too (standing, laches, abstention)

They have three theories for why they can sue:
1) Violation of the Electors Clause of the Constitution ("the Constitution gives state legislatures exclusive control of the manner of selecting electors and judicial action can't change it)
2) "Counties applied different rules"

And 3) "you didn't have as strict voter ID requirements as we'd like, and that's unconstitutional for reasons"

That's it. That's the case

Somebody asked me about this idiotic "PenceCard 2: Electric Boogaloo" article, and people, just stop worrying about this stuff.

The conspiracy wing of the GOP is going to keep pumping out these "Ten Neat Tricks to steal an election [number 8 will shock you!]" articles straight through the inauguration. (Yes - don't expect this to stop after the electoral votes are counted)

None of it is real. None of it has any legal basis. It's fantasy written by fantasists for coping MAGA-ites who find reality just too painful to accept. Ignore it.

This particular flavor of wishcasting was written by Ted Noel. Unless there are two "Ted Noel"s writing nonsense for the American Thinker, Noel is a doctor, not a lawyer or scholar, who nevertheless writes about legal issues

This actually makes me feel a bit better, because the thought that a *lawyer* could think that Pence had "plenary power" to discard state election certificates for any reason he chose is - even after watching Wood, Powell, Kaardal, and the rest - somehow too hard to contemplate

What's the "value" offered by international relations scholarship?

What does it mean to think about world events "like an international relations scholar"?

Trump's order to withdrawal 🇺🇸 troops from 🇸🇴 offers a useful

This event could be viewed from a variety of angles, from the "micro-level" on up.

International Relations scholars/analysts can and do use each of the following angles, though not all are strictly speaking taking an "International Relations angle".

Let's explore the angles.

The "country-expert" angle entails discussing the event by laying out the situation within Somalia, providing details on key figures involved and perhaps how the conflict has disrupted Somalia's internal governance and

The "Military/Security analyst" angle involves outlining the details of what US troops presently do in Somalia and how they carry out their mission (including equipment, mission, and tactics).

See this @ChathamHouse report by

The "Area Studies/Regional Expert" angle involves discussing the decision as an event that will impact the Horn of Africa or East Africa more

1/Today's @bopinion post is about Trump's taxes, and what they show about how America allocates capital.

We appear to have some big problems.

2/Trump has a bunch of businesses that lose money. Our financial system has lent him money to throw into unsuccessful golf courses, hotels, and so

3/A lot of these loans are loans that Trump hasn't even paid back yet, using loopholes in the tax system to avoid paying taxes on those unpaid debts.

Why would creditors give money to a guy who wastes the money on bad businesses and doesn't even pay them back?

4/One seemingly obvious answer is that capital is just really cheap these days. Companies are able to borrow more easily than at any time in the last few decades.

5/But this presents us with a mystery.

Why hasn't an abundance of cheap capital caused the return on financial capital to fall? Interest rates are low, but stock returns have held up strongly.

‘The perfect target’: Russia cultivated Trump as asset for 40 years.

This really doesn’t surprise anyone, right? It shouldn’t — most of us have been talking about it on Twitter for at least four years.

“Then, in 1987, Trump visited Moscow and St Petersburg for the first time. Shvets said he was fed KGB talking points and flattered by KGB operatives who floated the idea that he should go into politics.” 2/X

Shortly after, Trump began considering running for POTUS one day.

“For the KGB, it was a charm offensive. They had collected a lot of information on his personality so they knew who he was personally. The feeling was that he was extremely vulnerable intellectually, and psychologically, and he was prone to flattery.” 3/X

I’ve often discussed how Trump was vulnerable to world leaders and intelligence agencies due to the fact that it’s so easy to get inside his bubble — you just have to satiate his ego and his personal sense of grandiosity.

Say nice things and spend money at his properties. 4/X

“This is what they exploited. They played the game as if they were immensely impressed by his personality and believed this is the guy who should be the president of the United States one day”

Putin is a master at this. 5/X

Trumps Amtsenthebung II: Auch dieses Mal wird der abgewählte Präsident nicht seines Amtes enthoben, so wie genau vor einem Jahr. Und zwar schon heute. Aber was ist da heute passiert?

1) Offene Fragen: Immer mehr Details zur Kommunikation zwischen Trump & im Kapitol befindlichen

RepublikanerInnen während des Kapitol-Sturms werden bekannt. So soll Trump in einem Telefonat mit engen Verbündeten die Bitte aktiv verneint haben, den Mob über Social Media zurückzupfeifen - "die Leute sind offenbar wütender als ihr über das, was da passiert ist", soll er laut

einer Republikanerin gesagt worden, der vom Anruf erzählt wurde. Und in den heutigen späten Nachmittagsstunden sind Gerüchte über weitere Kommunikation zwischen Trump und im Kapitol befindlichen RepublikanerInnen laut geworden. Das alles genau nachzuforschen, war auch der Plan

der demokratischen AnklägerInnen aus dem RepräsentantInnenhaus, die dafür für viele überraschend eine kurzfristige Abstimmung anberaumten und die ebenso überraschend deutlich mit 55:45 gewannen.

2) Der Deal: Dann muss es zwischen demokratischer und republikanischer Führung des

Senats zu einem Deal gekommen sein, der viele Trump-GegnerInnen erzürnt: Anstatt ZeugInnen vorzuladen und damit den Prozess gegen Trump zu intensivieren und zu verlängern, wurde vereinbart, die mediale Aussage der Republikanerin über das Telefonat einfach zu Protokoll zu nehmen