December 30, 2016 7:00 AM HomePoliticsMorning Reads for Friday, December 30, 2016 Morning Reads for Friday, December 30, 2016 By Ginny Politics 13 Comments 2016, be gone! Like most of my geeky friends, my heart is broken. Everyone should read this. Food for thought. Different strokes for different folks. Or something. ESPN ratings tank. Wonder why… They didn’t just fade away. They traveled discreetly, bringing earth from their native land in coffins, hid in the shadows and bided their time. Some of that time was spent in Maryland. Eeeek. SkyNet. Those Chinese… Is he trying to start a war in his final days in office? Lurch’s final disaster. Didn’t an X-files movie already cover this? I know several people who would immediately install this in their homes (cough, cough, you know who you are). Share this:TwitterFacebookTumblrRedditEmailPrint Related About Author Ginny 13 Comments Saltycracker Education needs more money for the generous early retirement life, what to tap next, property taxes or casinos? The teacher’s pension funds are coming up shorter and shorter as time goes by. That 7.5% forecasted return might need tweaking too. http://news.wabe.org/post/ga-s-pension-funds-had-bad-year-are-deeper-debt December 30, 2016 8:11 AM Log in to Reply xdog War? Disaster? Just hold on a bit and Trump can officially make nice to Bibi and PuPu and then we’ll all be safe and happy. December 30, 2016 8:25 AM Log in to Reply David C If they think diplomatic and intelligence sanctions are going to start a war, wait until they find out what Ronnie Reagan was up to from 1981-83… December 30, 2016 10:15 AM Log in to Reply xdog How about one of you pros explain the ins and outs of this story about the Senate Republican Caucus agreeing to merge two Judiciary committees, thereby squeezing out Josh McKoon. Done deal? Is this being cast as an efficiency move or is it a direct effort to neuter McKoon? How does Jesse Stone get precedence over McKoon as committee head when they have equal seniority? http://politics.blog.ajc.com/2016/12/29/sponsor-of-religious-liberty-bill-could-lose-his-senate-chairmanship/ December 30, 2016 8:35 AM Log in to Reply Will Durant Certainly not a pro but I would speculate that it has to do with the balance of power in Georgia being the opposite of North Carolina’s new configuration. To paraphrase Emerson because the original is a bit too harsh; when you strike at a king make sure you get him. December 30, 2016 9:03 PM Log in to Reply xdog Yeah, I get that people are reacting to what happened in NC and IN but I was hoping for some details about the process. That’s more Galloway’s job I suppose. All those involved have to eat from the same table. December 31, 2016 8:26 AM Log in to Reply bethebalance Not a pro, either, but it is a most efficient way of sidelining McKoon and reducing or eliminating all the hype, distraction, political gamesmanship, and lost productivity associated with a religious lib bill. the split between two judiciary committees, i believe, was made because of the volume of work, and perhaps the volume and specificity of professional opinions brought by the lawyers who tend to gravitate toward judiciary matters. putting them back together is gonna be a lot of volume to handle. January 1, 2017 12:26 PM Log in to Reply Noway2016 Once again: The DNC leaked emails have never had their voracity questioned. The content was the truth. The hacking was known about a year and a half earlier. Presumably, it would have been dealt with by Prez Hillary but she turned out to have been a bad candidate. Oops! Now President Fife sends a handful home to placate his base of sniveling losers. Trump’s right, January 20th will be here soon and we’ll see the adults in charge. December 30, 2016 5:12 PM Log in to Reply CoastalCat Trump is treading very close to treason. Coupled with self-dealing shouldn’t be too hard to arrange an impeachment. Pence is next and he can go too. At least with feckless Ryan, an adult will be in charge. December 30, 2016 9:38 PM Log in to Reply Noway2016 You’re post is absurd on its face but to take your fantasy further you’ll have to prove “intent.” Remember “intent” CC? Y’all screeched about it enough with regard to Hillary ‘s situation. Applies here, too. Sorry… December 31, 2016 3:10 PM Log in to Reply David C No you don’t. Impeachment means whatever 50%+1 of the House and 2/3 of the Senate say it is. It’s not (and has never been) a pure court of law, with the various agreed upon elements of criminal liability, standards of evidence, and burdens of proof. He could be tried separately in Federal Court (or, if he commits a state crime, whichever one has jurisdiction) after he’s removed from office (hence Nixon’s Pardon) where all that would matter. But for impeachment, none of that does. The substance of the illegality and procedures matter for legitimacy (not least of which because any successful impeachment and removal from office, as demonstrated by the events of 1974 and 1999, requires bipartisan agreement) but they are not required. December 31, 2016 3:38 PM Log in to Reply Noway2016 Never gonna happen, but David, to quote the great Steve Perry, “Don’t Stop Believin’. LMAO! December 31, 2016 3:46 PM Log in to Reply David C ?…I wasn’t endorsing or predicting it one way or the other. Just pointing out how Impeachment (which is fundamentally Constitutional Law at its most basic form) doesn’t work like whatever you’re talking about. There’s not some grand jury or judicial review here. Just the Congress. If anything, by (accurately) pointing out that any successful impeachment would require both the Dems and GOP to agree on it, I was implicitly arguing that it was highly unlikely. January 1, 2017 9:57 PM Add a Comment Cancel replyYou must be logged in to post a comment.