I'm not enough of a Senate fanboi to know all the senators... but the magic number is 17 and from what I've seen there are about 7 probable, 6 leaning, and 7 possible R Senators.
Which to my sales brain means the next step is framing it so that the 13 leaning/possible senators can defend a non-Trump principle that they can campaign on in the next cycle. Which would mean in practice that they can defend both a better voting process, reduced fraud, *and* the remove of Trump for subverting the election.
For bonus points I'd look at 2024 hopefuls and offer them a "proxy" vote/truce ... that is, if they deliver a 'possible' in their faction, we'll give them a gentleman's agreement not to push their 'No' vote in the election... but that requires all sorts of machinations/trust that I'm not sure exists.
To paraphrase Sun Tzu... don't cut off their hope of escape.
The success of the impeachment depends upon the framing of it such that Trump is being impeached for attempting to subvert an election including but not limited to the GA call and the riot during the certification.
Stay away from defining 'crimes' and other lawyerly pursuits... else we're defining 'incite' vs. 'conspire' vs. 'sedition' vs. 'insurrection' (vs. 'obstruction') it's not necessary, and ultimately you'll lose just enough support to make it feasible to wiggle out of the big picture into using 'it wasn't actually sedition' to vote no.
A quick skim of the actual articles shows that this is the main thrust and I think they are solid... I might have suggested that they add a nod to the due legal process that the Trump campaign was afforded to bring to light any substantial fraud ... which confirms fair recourse and access to the courts which have reviewed and rejected their claims.
But in the end... the bi-partisan take is the subversion of elections broadly construed... Let Republican Senators vote on upholding the election process, and don't make it about legal definition splitting.
I'll take the votes if they can deliver, but won't lie that it's more than a little oogy for me to see the Neo-Cons thinking they will get back the party.
I guess the reporter was self-filming? Else the camera should at least pan to show he's ok and all the other commotion is cascading inanimate objects? Or the camera man has a real sense of comedic timing?
Well, so much for my plan to cut/paste/send to Ajit Pai with a note: problem solved in a comment, dude.
I guess I'd put it this way, we should stop ignoring that there aren't tech races to establish platforms/protocols with winners/losers. On the one hand, we want to encourage Tech Races, and we live with winners/losers. But we still have to make sure that when Winners win they monetize the value not the moat. So at some point having won the network-effect race, we allow the monetization at the transaction level, not at the network level... so phase 2 of a healthy capitalism allows other folks to build businesses on top of platforms that are regulated to provide platform status.
It's a bit like electricity vs. electricities... or a phone network vs. networks... that's what the original 230 was meant to address... the network backbone... but we've moved forward from mere electricity to mere communication protocols to mere network exchanges... and the network exchanges can be local/small/curated or broad/open/transactional. When you win, you win the transaction war... but at the expense of the curated content/data owner wars.
That's why I'm not a simple repeal-230 guy... there are rewards and incentives we want to keep, and incentives we want to discourage... with the idea being that you monetize the value not the monopoly.
Given the security around the event, I think the likelihood is low... that said, in my screenplay version the head of the Secret Service sits Trump down and very politely but firmly informs him that he has two choices: 1) Sit his ass next to the incoming president for the duration, or 2) wear this special device and hope that no one even faints in a dramatic fashion at the event.
After the inauguration, his detail will remove the device. Enjoy your day, Sir... let us know which you prefer.
Washington Post is reporting that McConnel has informed the Senate that absent 100 unanimous votes to reconvene, the earliest the Senate could receive the Articles of Impeachment is Jan 19 and the earliest it could begin the trial procedures would be Jan 20/21...
Interesting read on the Parliamentary processes and rules we were wondering about.
On the whole Platform vs. Publisher vs. Club question... I'd consider introducing a new test for platform status: an open standard. That is, if the content generated on your platform is fully open for other services to write to, consume and distribute and curate... then you are a platform. Breaks-up the thorny/sticky issue of network effect and competition.
You can keep club status up to a certain point... beyond a certain number of subscribers, we're obviously not a club so either a publisher or platform... so decide if the value of a monopoly of a limited set of users/content is more important than the value of a large platform business where the content/users are not monopolized.
There's a lot more with regards content ownership and privacy... but moving towards business friendly models that offer protections where protections are warranted, keep competition in the forefront, and allow a platform to monetize its platform status as it gives up its user/content network/monopoly.
Eh, I'm post-Liberal enough to think that Liberalism itself is trending towards an authoritarian future... so sure? But part of my (self-)interest in impeaching Trump is recognizing we'll need to possibly impeach future President X (could be D or R or Other). I want the impeachment gears well oiled and functioning...
I guess I don't see Impeachment as a bloody horse head. It's a terrible threat because the runway is too long, so it doesn't compel good behavior just a sort of modulation to play against time.
I suppose its the professional experience in Sales that makes me extremely sensitive to time... time kills all deals is a common saying for us. You have to execute while you have focus, energy and support... all those things ebb away with time.
I haven't seen either, so will withhold judgement on which might be better... but my point stands, if the goal is removal/disqualification it doesn't matter whether the articles make *us* feel good, it only matters if they make 16 R's feel good enough to vote yes. That's the only audience that matters.
I don't mind Pelosi/Schumer calling Pence... heck they should be calling all R Senators too... but the *if* clause she was throwing around was stupid. If Pence doesn't invoke the 25th...? From the Speaker of the House? That's weak sauce. If she lost even a day with such nonsense (no idea if she did) then that's just on her.
I have a suspicion, though, that Congress as an institution really doesn't like Impeachment... I think it's sort of an inherent institutional bias... but I think it's real. I also think institutionally there are lots of things Congress can do, but doesn't like to do.
I probably wasn't clear... by swiftly I meant in the next 14 days +/- ... If we're "debating" the matter in April I'd suggest it's a dead letter and the backlash would be in the form of Senators refusing to vote for it since removal is already done and enough time would have passed that disqualification would seem like a political vendetta. That's what I mean by backlash in this context.
ooops... probably should have clarified that I was specifically referring the the last two sentences:
"let the GOP put their money where their mouth is and demonstrate where they stand on this matter. It would be illuminating and that’d be useful even if they didn’t vote to remove Trump"
Yes and no... that's sort of my point... it would be really easy to write articles of impeachment that would actually give cover to R's for *not* voting to impeach. The harder route is not doing that. Have to find the, what, 16 Senators that might be persuadable and write it exactly to their specifications. And, as I note above, it's also time sensitive.
But if the goal is rhetorical... then it's still only effective as I describe above.
Anything else would only be rhetorically effective for the same tribe.
Thanks... I was wondering if an impeachment could continue after the person no longer held the office.
Politically this only really works in a small window... once Biden is already president and Private Citizen Trump is tweeting in Mar-a-Lago... you're playing the calculus of whether disqualifying Trump is better for some subset of Senators and whether there are enough 'other' Senators who will work with the Stabby Senators to do the Stabbing so those other Senators can pretend not to stab.
Plus, absent the immediacy and 'over lawyering' the case will simply deprive those factions of the plausibility cover they would need to act... so I don't see anything happening at all in, say, April. In fact, by April I'd see a backlash.
Might not like the calculus, but that's what it would be...
My favorite storyline is the Pace/Trubitsky Harvard Business Review Cautionary Tale in the making.
* Trade a 2nd/3rd/4th rounder to move up One (1) spot in the draft to pick a QB not on anyone's radar.
* ???
* Bench QB in Decision Year
* Decline final year on Rookie Contract
* UnBench QB - squeak into playoffs
* Re-sign over-valued QB at highly inflated Rate
* Go to Step 2.
Harkening back to way back, hmmn, Weds, and our discussion on how quickly Impeachment might happen... the Intertubes say that an Impeachment vote is being planned for mid next week? And that strikes me as about as fast as these wheels can turn... but by the time it gets to the senate? That's why I thought the 25th is/was the only viable path... in this case the cumbersome mechanisms of the 25th work just fine with playing out the clock.
On a purely tactical note it is still the case that the only impeachment that would possibly work is one that is Republican backed... I'm hoping that the early reports that AOC had been delegated the task were media hype of AOC usurping the task and that this is what Politico is signaling:
"Two sets of articles of impeachment have already been drafted, and Democratic leaders have coalesced behind those led by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee."
Given the simple framework of the scenario: Incitement to Riot and the Georgia Post-Election Stuff [insert appropriate legal term here]... would even recommend giving the drafting to any republican who would do it.
There mighn't be any... but if there is, then step aside.
My fear would be that the temptation would be to try to write some sweeping indictment of Trump, the Party, voters, any one who clicked on his election website, people who use facebook and some folks on twitter... you know who they are. Instead of keeping it tight and defensible (enough) for some Republicans to do the right thing.
The only thing better than an impromptu 7-day weekend granted by one of your exiting Top Exec (kinda like a corporate pardon? - no politics) is the 2-day work week that starts on Thurs. Hey, it's Friday already!
I must have gone to the well too many times because I said to my wife, "Hey what are we..." and she cut in: "Nothing, absolutely nothing." Jan and Feb are gonna be tough... usually we work in a fancy dinner / get-away weekend in one of those months... this year? Nothing absolutely nothing.
The only thing bolstering spirits is the addition/remodel we're doing... it's nearing completion and we're at the stage where instead of being excited about insulation batting we get to be excited about window trim and lighting... and giddy with anticipation at the tile. Probably over-compensating Jan/Feb/Covid blah's by overspending on the nesting/decorating budget. But anything is better than nothing absolutely nothing.
On “It’s Not Just About A Speech: Impeachment and President Trump”
I'm not enough of a Senate fanboi to know all the senators... but the magic number is 17 and from what I've seen there are about 7 probable, 6 leaning, and 7 possible R Senators.
Which to my sales brain means the next step is framing it so that the 13 leaning/possible senators can defend a non-Trump principle that they can campaign on in the next cycle. Which would mean in practice that they can defend both a better voting process, reduced fraud, *and* the remove of Trump for subverting the election.
For bonus points I'd look at 2024 hopefuls and offer them a "proxy" vote/truce ... that is, if they deliver a 'possible' in their faction, we'll give them a gentleman's agreement not to push their 'No' vote in the election... but that requires all sorts of machinations/trust that I'm not sure exists.
To paraphrase Sun Tzu... don't cut off their hope of escape.
"
Right... you impeach on the principle. Period.
"
The success of the impeachment depends upon the framing of it such that Trump is being impeached for attempting to subvert an election including but not limited to the GA call and the riot during the certification.
Stay away from defining 'crimes' and other lawyerly pursuits... else we're defining 'incite' vs. 'conspire' vs. 'sedition' vs. 'insurrection' (vs. 'obstruction') it's not necessary, and ultimately you'll lose just enough support to make it feasible to wiggle out of the big picture into using 'it wasn't actually sedition' to vote no.
A quick skim of the actual articles shows that this is the main thrust and I think they are solid... I might have suggested that they add a nod to the due legal process that the Trump campaign was afforded to bring to light any substantial fraud ... which confirms fair recourse and access to the courts which have reviewed and rejected their claims.
But in the end... the bi-partisan take is the subversion of elections broadly construed... Let Republican Senators vote on upholding the election process, and don't make it about legal definition splitting.
On “Impeachment, President Trump, and Evidence That Demands a Verdict”
"to go back to bombing the ME and striking sweetheart trade deals with sweat-shop countries"
I said Neo-Cons, not Biden.
Ba da boom...here all week, folks.
"
I'll take the votes if they can deliver, but won't lie that it's more than a little oogy for me to see the Neo-Cons thinking they will get back the party.
On “Humor: The Sound of Falling”
3. Wedding cake.
4. Bear trap.
I guess the reporter was self-filming? Else the camera should at least pan to show he's ok and all the other commotion is cascading inanimate objects? Or the camera man has a real sense of comedic timing?
On “From Twitter Safety: Donald Trump’s Twitter Account has been Permanently Suspended”
Well, so much for my plan to cut/paste/send to Ajit Pai with a note: problem solved in a comment, dude.
I guess I'd put it this way, we should stop ignoring that there aren't tech races to establish platforms/protocols with winners/losers. On the one hand, we want to encourage Tech Races, and we live with winners/losers. But we still have to make sure that when Winners win they monetize the value not the moat. So at some point having won the network-effect race, we allow the monetization at the transaction level, not at the network level... so phase 2 of a healthy capitalism allows other folks to build businesses on top of platforms that are regulated to provide platform status.
It's a bit like electricity vs. electricities... or a phone network vs. networks... that's what the original 230 was meant to address... the network backbone... but we've moved forward from mere electricity to mere communication protocols to mere network exchanges... and the network exchanges can be local/small/curated or broad/open/transactional. When you win, you win the transaction war... but at the expense of the curated content/data owner wars.
That's why I'm not a simple repeal-230 guy... there are rewards and incentives we want to keep, and incentives we want to discourage... with the idea being that you monetize the value not the monopoly.
On “The Destructive High Water Mark of MAGA”
Given the security around the event, I think the likelihood is low... that said, in my screenplay version the head of the Secret Service sits Trump down and very politely but firmly informs him that he has two choices: 1) Sit his ass next to the incoming president for the duration, or 2) wear this special device and hope that no one even faints in a dramatic fashion at the event.
After the inauguration, his detail will remove the device. Enjoy your day, Sir... let us know which you prefer.
"
Washington Post is reporting that McConnel has informed the Senate that absent 100 unanimous votes to reconvene, the earliest the Senate could receive the Articles of Impeachment is Jan 19 and the earliest it could begin the trial procedures would be Jan 20/21...
Interesting read on the Parliamentary processes and rules we were wondering about.
On “From Twitter Safety: Donald Trump’s Twitter Account has been Permanently Suspended”
He would resign at 11:59 am giving us a full minute of Anarchy before Biden officially takes over.
"
On the whole Platform vs. Publisher vs. Club question... I'd consider introducing a new test for platform status: an open standard. That is, if the content generated on your platform is fully open for other services to write to, consume and distribute and curate... then you are a platform. Breaks-up the thorny/sticky issue of network effect and competition.
You can keep club status up to a certain point... beyond a certain number of subscribers, we're obviously not a club so either a publisher or platform... so decide if the value of a monopoly of a limited set of users/content is more important than the value of a large platform business where the content/users are not monopolized.
There's a lot more with regards content ownership and privacy... but moving towards business friendly models that offer protections where protections are warranted, keep competition in the forefront, and allow a platform to monetize its platform status as it gives up its user/content network/monopoly.
"
Heh, suspending Trump's account two weeks before he's out of power is the Elaine Chao of suspensions.
On “The Destructive High Water Mark of MAGA”
Eh, I'm post-Liberal enough to think that Liberalism itself is trending towards an authoritarian future... so sure? But part of my (self-)interest in impeaching Trump is recognizing we'll need to possibly impeach future President X (could be D or R or Other). I want the impeachment gears well oiled and functioning...
"
I guess I don't see Impeachment as a bloody horse head. It's a terrible threat because the runway is too long, so it doesn't compel good behavior just a sort of modulation to play against time.
I suppose its the professional experience in Sales that makes me extremely sensitive to time... time kills all deals is a common saying for us. You have to execute while you have focus, energy and support... all those things ebb away with time.
"
I haven't seen either, so will withhold judgement on which might be better... but my point stands, if the goal is removal/disqualification it doesn't matter whether the articles make *us* feel good, it only matters if they make 16 R's feel good enough to vote yes. That's the only audience that matters.
I don't mind Pelosi/Schumer calling Pence... heck they should be calling all R Senators too... but the *if* clause she was throwing around was stupid. If Pence doesn't invoke the 25th...? From the Speaker of the House? That's weak sauce. If she lost even a day with such nonsense (no idea if she did) then that's just on her.
I have a suspicion, though, that Congress as an institution really doesn't like Impeachment... I think it's sort of an inherent institutional bias... but I think it's real. I also think institutionally there are lots of things Congress can do, but doesn't like to do.
"
I probably wasn't clear... by swiftly I meant in the next 14 days +/- ... If we're "debating" the matter in April I'd suggest it's a dead letter and the backlash would be in the form of Senators refusing to vote for it since removal is already done and enough time would have passed that disqualification would seem like a political vendetta. That's what I mean by backlash in this context.
"
ooops... probably should have clarified that I was specifically referring the the last two sentences:
"let the GOP put their money where their mouth is and demonstrate where they stand on this matter. It would be illuminating and that’d be useful even if they didn’t vote to remove Trump"
"
Yes and no... that's sort of my point... it would be really easy to write articles of impeachment that would actually give cover to R's for *not* voting to impeach. The harder route is not doing that. Have to find the, what, 16 Senators that might be persuadable and write it exactly to their specifications. And, as I note above, it's also time sensitive.
But if the goal is rhetorical... then it's still only effective as I describe above.
Anything else would only be rhetorically effective for the same tribe.
On “Weekend Plans Post: First Weekend after the First Real Week of 2021”
Ouch. Lovely ballpark though. Once convinced our Marketing group to rent a skybox for a 'customer event' at Camden. That was fun.
On “The Destructive High Water Mark of MAGA”
Thanks... I was wondering if an impeachment could continue after the person no longer held the office.
Politically this only really works in a small window... once Biden is already president and Private Citizen Trump is tweeting in Mar-a-Lago... you're playing the calculus of whether disqualifying Trump is better for some subset of Senators and whether there are enough 'other' Senators who will work with the Stabby Senators to do the Stabbing so those other Senators can pretend not to stab.
Plus, absent the immediacy and 'over lawyering' the case will simply deprive those factions of the plausibility cover they would need to act... so I don't see anything happening at all in, say, April. In fact, by April I'd see a backlash.
Might not like the calculus, but that's what it would be...
On “Weekend Plans Post: First Weekend after the First Real Week of 2021”
Well, it could be worse, we could be Mets fans...
"
My favorite storyline is the Pace/Trubitsky Harvard Business Review Cautionary Tale in the making.
* Trade a 2nd/3rd/4th rounder to move up One (1) spot in the draft to pick a QB not on anyone's radar.
* ???
* Bench QB in Decision Year
* Decline final year on Rookie Contract
* UnBench QB - squeak into playoffs
* Re-sign over-valued QB at highly inflated Rate
* Go to Step 2.
On “The Destructive High Water Mark of MAGA”
Harkening back to way back, hmmn, Weds, and our discussion on how quickly Impeachment might happen... the Intertubes say that an Impeachment vote is being planned for mid next week? And that strikes me as about as fast as these wheels can turn... but by the time it gets to the senate? That's why I thought the 25th is/was the only viable path... in this case the cumbersome mechanisms of the 25th work just fine with playing out the clock.
On a purely tactical note it is still the case that the only impeachment that would possibly work is one that is Republican backed... I'm hoping that the early reports that AOC had been delegated the task were media hype of AOC usurping the task and that this is what Politico is signaling:
"Two sets of articles of impeachment have already been drafted, and Democratic leaders have coalesced behind those led by Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), a member of the House Judiciary Committee."
Given the simple framework of the scenario: Incitement to Riot and the Georgia Post-Election Stuff [insert appropriate legal term here]... would even recommend giving the drafting to any republican who would do it.
There mighn't be any... but if there is, then step aside.
My fear would be that the temptation would be to try to write some sweeping indictment of Trump, the Party, voters, any one who clicked on his election website, people who use facebook and some folks on twitter... you know who they are. Instead of keeping it tight and defensible (enough) for some Republicans to do the right thing.
On “Weekend Plans Post: First Weekend after the First Real Week of 2021”
Go Football Team Go. Football well you Footballers. (Well akshually, in Europe...)
Eh, I'll watch the Bears wander around the middle part of the field for a few hours... so there's that, I guess.
"
The only thing better than an impromptu 7-day weekend granted by one of your exiting Top Exec (kinda like a corporate pardon? - no politics) is the 2-day work week that starts on Thurs. Hey, it's Friday already!
I must have gone to the well too many times because I said to my wife, "Hey what are we..." and she cut in: "Nothing, absolutely nothing." Jan and Feb are gonna be tough... usually we work in a fancy dinner / get-away weekend in one of those months... this year? Nothing absolutely nothing.
The only thing bolstering spirits is the addition/remodel we're doing... it's nearing completion and we're at the stage where instead of being excited about insulation batting we get to be excited about window trim and lighting... and giddy with anticipation at the tile. Probably over-compensating Jan/Feb/Covid blah's by overspending on the nesting/decorating budget. But anything is better than nothing absolutely nothing.