https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Government_shutdowns_in_the_United_States#Overview
Shutdowns have occurred since 1980 when the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that government operations need to cease in a lapse of appropriations to prevent violation of the Anti-Deficiency Act. I believe the opinion was rendered during the Carter Administration.
They should propose a bill that makes a lapse in appropriations trigger a CR so there’s no need for a shutdown.
If the election were 2026, I’d place a less than 1% chance on Vance being the guy the GOP backs for POTUS. Dude’s a complete wiener, and even the rest of the party seems to think so
That’s awesome, man!
People talk a lot of shit about boomers. George Carlin was a boomer though, lol.
lol… we are in violent agreement 😂
You’re describing exactly what I’m talking about. Definitely case by case.
There is something to be said for age and experience. I think a large part of the reason why executives in the corporate world, and in politics, is it usually takes a lifetime to get yourself into a position to take on the role in the first place.
In principle, I have no issue with someone in their 60’s being the POTUS. A 65 year old in good physical health should also have more than adequate cognitive function to do the job.
If I have any issues with someone that age in that role, it’s that they’ve likely lost touch with the needs of the people who elected them.
I wonder if there was any asbestos in that area…
It likely means that her district has been gerrymandered such that she doesn’t stand a shot at winning anymore.
I’m pretty sure he’d have yielded if they were going to vote on the bill, and it had a shot at passing.
Yeah, I’m not a lawyer… I’m just talking out loud.
lol, yeah. I’m totally not a lawyer, but I do believe that in criminal cases that’s how it works between the defendant and the plaintiff. The defendant gets to face their accuser.
Now, this might be a civil suit, and I don’t know how that relates or changes in civil law. This seems like a civil tort case.
The defendant has the right to identify their accuser…
It’s just that in this case, the defendant is the ATF because they were overstepping their authority.
And now the ATF will have at least a partial list of gun owners. I guess the intent is to provide relief to these and only these plaintiffs? i.e. the ATF can restrict the sale of firearms to individuals aged 18-20 with anyone NOT named on that list?
They absolutely still exist.
Nope… he was the director for the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and the 2nd Chief Medical Adviser to the President .
John Stewart would be a good Secretary of State…
Or Veterans Affairs
Would go better than this, actually. He’d be incompetent but he’d know that and I think he’d at least attempt to surround himself with competence.
Well… it’s less likely
Na… they see exactly that. This is theatrical hand waving so they’ll be able to point to a counter example where the “Dems did the same thing!”
Hey, no worries. That’s how we all grow. I’m wrong all the fucking time.