Many grand juries operate in complete secrecy until they hand down indictments

Just saying ...

Another thing that makes black people just wanna holler and throw up our hands

What's wrong with this picture?
https://twitter.com/SashaBeauloux/status/1355524128464318465

Insightful comment from a white friend

A close friend of mine who is white and married to a black woman told me that being married to her taught him so much more about race than he realized.

"Because of her, you now have a better idea of what it's like to be black?" I asked.

"No," he said. "I still have no idea what it's like to be black. But because of her, I have a much better understanding of what it means to be white."

Is President Biden going too far with his executive orders?

I mean, c'mon, Joe ... Maybe you need to slow your roll for a few days.



On edit: It amazes me that this is even necessary, but:

Thank God Pelosi didn't rush to deliver the Article of Impeachment to the Senate

I suspected that, had the House delivered the Article of Impeachment to the Senate while McConnell was still in charge, he would have killed it.

After yesterday, there can be no doubt that's exactly what he would have done. McConnell was sitting there waiting to get his hands on it so he could call a vote and dismiss the impeachment before a trial and I have no doubt he'd have managed to get the votes.

The last Bernie in Coat and Mittens meme you will ever need to see

"Schumer needs to GROW A SPINE and make McConnell give him what he wants!!!"

{Schumer makes McConnell give him what he wants}

"Meh ..."

Rachel Maddow just announced that McConnell has caved and agreed to Schumer's demands

Sen. Leahy will preside over the Impeachment trial

The Emoluments Clause case dismissal is not the end of the world

Although at first blush, the Supreme Court's dismissal of CREW's Emoluments Clause case against Trump seems outrageous, on closer review, it doesn't seem as bad as it first appeared. I would have preferred the Court continued with the case but I think there's a valid reason for the dismissal and the dismissal does not mean Trump cannot be held accountable for Emoluments Clause violations in the future. This was a dismissal of one particular case, not a finding that the Emoluments Clauses don't apply to Trump or that he can't be held liable for violating it.

I think the dismissal hinged on the fact that this case sought injunctive relief, e.g., an order enjoining Trump from continuing to violate the Emoluments Clauses, and "requiring [him] to release financial records sufficient to confirm that [he] is not engaging in any further transactions that would violate the Emoluments Clauses." That language in the complaint is probably what made the case moot - the relief the plaintiffs were seeking was rendered untenable as soon as Trump left office and is no longer subject to violating the Emoluments Clauses. As of January 20, he could no longer violate the Emoluments Clauses, so requests that the Court order him to stop violating it and prove that he stopped violating it are no longer viable.

This doesn't mean that he can't be - or hasn't already been - sued for violating the Emoluments Clauses. It just means that the Court determined that this specific case asking for remedies that can only be imposed on a sitting president was rendered moot by virtue of his leaving office and the goal of the lawsuit evaporated.

I'm not crazy about this decision, but I can live with it. There's plenty of other ways to hold him accountable for violating the Emoluments Clauses and the array of wrongdoing he engaged in before and after he became president.