January 6 Doesn’t Justify Wrecking the Filibuster

Joe Manchin makes it worse.Und noch FunThis refers to any attempt to pass a federal voter bill using whatever means are necessary.

Republicans don’t like the bill. They have blocked discussion on voting-related legislation multiple times and filibuster attempts to pass it in June, October and November 2021. Now, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) Senator Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D.N.Y.) is now warning that he will change Senate rules in the event of another attempt by conservative lawmakers. But Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.)—one of two Senate Democrats, along with Kyrsten Sinema (Ariz.), who has been opposed to such shenanigans—doesn’t think that’s the way to go.

It is currently 51 votes that are required to pass any post-debate Senate bill. To open or close debate, 60 votes are required. This means that it will take 60 Senate votes for anything to be passed. And getting 60 votes for Democrat-led legislation in the Senate—where 50 members are Republicans—is a tall order.

Democrats want to abolish or temporarily overcome the filibuster, so that they can pass a vote bill with a simple majority. the “nuclear choice”.

Some supporter suggest that passing the voter bill is too important not to be played by the normal rules. These supporters are using the anniversary of the Capitol riot last year as fuel (though there was nothing in voting legislation that would or could have stopped that).

Example: Trump and the MAGA mob tell us word for word what they’re doing. Their belief is that violence might be required if they can’t win their election. … And so the question for the Senate — and for filibuster fetishizers Sens. Kyrsten Sinema (D-Ariz.) and Joe Manchin III (D-W.Va.) — is whether to stop the former president and his ilk,” wrote Jennifer Rubin in The Washington PostYou can mix it all up with an especially melodramatic touch.

This is the latest pitch from Democratic voters. It’s more detached and skewed than ever. The Democratic voting agenda is based on the belief that there are only two ways to stop the fury unleashed by Jan. 6. One, impose same-day voter registration, no-excuse postal voting in the states. Two, end partisan gerrymandering. Three, require the counting of all ballots received up to seven business days after Election Day.

Manchin, Sinema and others are standing in the path of filibuster reforms. They don’t seem to be moving despite Democratic colleagues “launching an all-court press to exert pressure [them]CNN says it: “To back amendments to the filibuster which would allow Democrats to adopt voting legislation,”

Manchin, Tuesday’s statement, said that “being open for a rule change that would create nuclear options, it was very, very difficult.” It is not an easy task.

“Once you change a rule or you have a carve out, I’ve always said this—anytime there’s a carve out, you eat the whole turkey,” Manchin told reporters. There’s nothing left, because the turkey goes back-and-forth.”

Manchin is well aware that the short-term benefits of blocking filibustering the voting rights bill may come back to haunt Democrats in the future. Manchin stated that “it is best for us all to just do it ourselves, because it will end up going back at you pretty damn hard,” referring to the previous Democratic attempts to confirm lower-level judiciary judges by not using filibuster. The Republicans did the same in order to pass Supreme Court nominees.

“I was always for the rules to be done in the same manner we have always done them, with two-thirds voting,” he said. If you are able to make rules changes that benefit everyone, it’s usually a rule that will remain.”

It is not clear how exactly Democrats will change Senate procedures. Notes that there have been several options. The Hill:

Democrats proposed a “talking filibuster” that would allow opposition to slow down any bill as long as they could keep the floor. The bill then would be possible to pass with a simple majority.

Another idea being discussed would be to create a carve out that would exempt voting rights legislation from the filibuster while keeping it intact for other areas — an idea endorsed by President Biden.

Also, they have looked into smaller rule changes such as getting rid of the 60 vote hurdle to start debate. The change would eliminate the barrier to end debate. This would allow them to debate voting rights legislation. However, they’d still need GOP support for that debate.

Democrats also considered obtaining a guarantee for amendment votes, or making it easier and quicker to vote on bill that receive significant support from the committee.

Schumer stated that the Senate would vote on rule changes by January 17 regardless of whether Sinema and Manchin are present.

“It has to be done for the good of this country,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D–Ill.) told The Hill recently.

While Durbin and the other Democrats are all for filibuster reform, Ashe Schow points out that their views were often different back when they were a minority party. Durbin declared that the elimination of filibuster would end the Senate in 2018, as the Senate was “originally designed and established going back to its founding fathers”.


It is possible to can“Fire!” Both literally and metaphorically. Always refer to Jeff Kosseff (section 230 history lawyer) on free speech. At his most recent, AtlanticIn this video, he addresses the persistent myth of yelling in a crowded theatre is illegal. He also explains why that trope still fails to be used online for misinformation or inflammatory rhetoric.

Collins has been joined by some experts in health to use the metaphor of inflammatory propaganda against public measures for the pandemic. Alexander Vindman, a whistleblower in national security usedTucker Carlson’s compassionate portrayal of the Jan 6 rioters in a crowded theater was described by the Fox News host Tucker Carlson using the trope “crowded-theater”. Other people have classified hate speech similarly. Rashad Robinson (civil-rights advocate) said during a December House hearing that Big Tech profits from the amplifying of hatred. While I am aware that there have been conversations regarding the First Amendment, it is not without limitations.

This statement is subtextual. It states that certain speech can be too damaging to ignore. What can be done to stop it happening? The TV networks may choose not to air or discuss Carlson’s documentary. However, private online platforms are able to take down hate speech and misinformation prior it becomes viral. Perhaps because Facebook and Twitter remove some false or misleading posts—while failing to remove others—these platforms have created the expectation that someone should step in. This person is often the government, as the metaphor of the “crowded theater” suggests.

Although shouting “Fire!” at a crowd in a theater may seem like a First Amendment loophole, it isn’t. It can be regulated. This phrase was not used in cases that involved yelling, fires, crowds, or theatres. Charles T. Schenck (general secretary of U.S. Socialist Party) was convicted by a Philadelphia federal court that he had violated the Espionage Act through printing leaflets that criticised the military draft.

Find out more.


​​Political candidates embrace non-fungible tokens.It began as a way to encourage art with the Blockchain technology, which underlies cryptocurrency, in the early 2021s. Now it has spread to comic books franchises, politics, and gaming,” writes the note.Roll Call. Legal experts have been trying to determine if tokens are a security offering similar to stock offerings offered by public companies. This is subject to regulation and oversight of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.


• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) will stick with its earlier recommendation about when to end isolation after a positive COVID test or symptoms. Anthony Fauci, White House COVID-19 advisor, suggested earlier this week that the CDC might add a negative rapid testing to their recommendation. However, the agency decided not to do so.

• A record number of Americans quit their jobs in November.

• News consumption is way down from 2020 levels.

• Schools are reverting to 2020’s COVID playbook, writes Kerry McDonald.

• There’s a standoff between Chicago teachers and schools. The schools are set for in-person learning. However, the Chicago Teachers Union informed its teachers by way of a memo that January 18 would be the next day. This is according to the CBS affiliate. The district “has not yet addressed the plan beyond canceling classes Wednesday – and Mayor Lori Lightfoot earlier said the union does not get to make such a decision.”

• A new lawsuit is challenging Ohio’s 25-year-old school voucher plan.

• In California, new regulations adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board “prohibit overwatering yards, washing cars without a shutoff nozzle, hosing down sidewalks or watering grass within 48 hours after rainfall,” the Los Angeles Times reports.

• Kosovo is banning cryptocurrency mining in a bid to save electricity.