Monday, October 25, 2021
Monday, October 18, 2021
This has been an uncommon week, full of beginnings and endings, some personal, some familial, and some public. The loss of Colin Powell is the public loss, and a great loss for all America.
not yet a bride
Monday, October 11, 2021
If I had any brains at all, I would write: NO INTRO TODAY a la Ziggy, and take the day off.
People need change. No congressional seat belongs to anyone. It belongs only to the people.
A woman belongs in the house...the House of Representatives
Battling Bella was my kind of politician: frank, blunt, and open. I even liked her hats...especially her explanation:
I began wearing hats as a young lawyer because it helped me to establish my professional identity. Before that, whenever I was at a meeting, someone would ask me to get coffee.
At one of my first jobs, even though I was a buyer, I was asked to get the coffee at every meeting. I resented it like hell.
The real trick was, Bella didn't say anything new; she said what women were thinking and actually saying for a very long time. Sure, there were glimpses of women who made the system work for them, women like Eleanor of Aquitaine, Elizabeth I, Catherine the Great.....but until mass media happened, no woman ran for and won elected office.
Let me define mass media: anything that can be seen, heard, or read with days of publication or elocution. Books are the beginning, but until women were quoted (and usually vilified) in the press, heard on radio, and ultimately seen on television, gender roles were pretty much immutable. But that did not mean women were silent.
The story of Batsheva Hagiz may be fiction, but what she demands of herself and of the people around her is neither new nor anachronistic. The bedtime conversations she has are ones that any woman could've had with an intimate partner at any time during history. Just look at Lysistrata. Sure, it may be an ancient Greek comedy, but it didn't spring from the brow of Aristophanes without some basis in reality.
As ultimately published it was enriched with some important ideas of my daughter’s and some passages of her writing. But all that is most striking and profound in what was written by me belongs to my wife, coming from the fund of thought that had been made common to us both by our innumerable conversations and discussions on a topic that filled so large a place in our minds.
If you think they didn't lie in bed discussing this stuff, you've never been married/partnered.
Women have been subjected to subjugation since the beginning of time. There may have been a reason back when the goal was to be reproducing at a rapid rate because children died. Sure, pregnant women probably needed some measure of protection, although in some cultures, you deliver and go back to work the same day. (At least I had a week off when Senior Son was born.) And I get why men felt compelled to protect their families. This is a survival thing. But once clans, towns, villages, and cities are in place, the need diminishes while the subjugation continued unabated. After all, what guy doesn't wanna be an alpha male? Right?
Yet, by the middle of the 19th century, it was pretty routine for women to work. Men died; women had to support families. Necessity demanded women take on other roles. By the middle of the 20th century, the June Cleaver model was already wearing thin. Father did not always know best. And men still died...or just plain left...and women were de facto head of household. And as late as 1977, I could not get a car loan in my own name. Don't get me started about that.
Them days are gone. But not completely. There is a whole class of deviant men who are working very hard to turn our clocks back to 1902. They call themselves Republican Congressmen. If only their paramours would use pillow talk constructively.
Read THE POMEGRANATE when it comes out later this week. Next week, there will links to the book and the new website. You'll be richer for the experience.
Monday, October 4, 2021
|John and Rudy. Great couple.|
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL
January 6 scenario
7 states have transmitted dual slates of electors to the President of the Senate.
The 12th Amendment merely provides that “the President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted.” There is very solid legal authority, and historical precedent, for the view that the President of the Senate does the counting, including the resolution of disputed electoral votes (as Adams and Jefferson did while Vice President, regarding their own election as President), and all the Members of Congress can do is watch.
The Electoral Count Act, which is likely unconstitutional, provides:
If more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State shall have been received by the President of the Senate, those votes, and those only, shall be counted which shall have been regularly given by the electors who are shown by the determination mentioned in section 5 of this title to have been appointed, if the determination in said section provided for shall have been made, or by such successors or substitutes, in case of a vacancy in the board of electors so ascertained, as have been appointed to fill such vacancy in the mode provided by the laws of the State; but in case there shall arise the question which of two or more of such State authorities determining what electors have been appointed, as mentioned in section 5 of this title, is the lawful tribunal of such State, the votes regularly given of those electors, and those only, of such State shall be counted whose title as electors the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide is supported by the decision of such State so authorized by its law; and in such case of more than one return or paper purporting to be a return from a State, if there shall have been no such determination of the question in the State aforesaid, then those votes, and those only, shall be counted which the two Houses shall concurrently decide were cast by lawful electors appointed in accordance with the laws of the State, unless the two Houses, acting separately, shall concurrently decide such votes not to be the lawful votes of the legally appointed electors of such State. But if the two Houses shall disagree in respect of the counting of such votes, then, and in that case, the votes of the electors whose appointment shall have been certified by the executive of the State, under the seal thereof, shall be counted.
This is the piece that we believe is unconstitutional. It allows the two houses, “acting separately,” to decide the question, whereas the 12th Amendment provides only for a joint session. And if there is disagreement, under the Act the slate certified by the “executive” of the state is to be counted, regardless of the evidence that exists regarding the election, and regardless of whether there was ever fair review of what happened in the election, by judges and/or state legislatures.
So here’s the scenario we propose:
1. VP Pence, presiding over the joint session (or Senate Pro Tempore Grassley, if Pence recuses himself), begins to open and count the ballots, starting with Alabama (without conceding that the procedure, specified by the Electoral Count Act, of going through the States alphabetically is required).
2. When he gets to Arizona, he announces that he has multiple slates of electors, and so is going to defer decision on that until finishing the other States. This would be the first break with the procedure set out in the Act.
3. At the end, he announces that because of the ongoing disputes in the 7 States, there are no electors that can be deemed validly appointed in those States. That means the total number of “electors appointed” – the language of the 12th Amendment -- is 454. This reading of the 12th Amendment has also been advanced by Harvard Law Professor Laurence Tribe (here). A “majority of the electors appointed” would therefore be 228. There are at this point 232 votes for Trump, 222 votes for Biden. Pence then gavels President Trump as re-elected
4. Howls, of course, from the Democrats, who now claim, contrary to Tribe’s prior position, that 270 is required. So Pence says, fine. Pursuant to the 12th Amendment, no candidate has achieved the necessary majority. That sends the matter to the House, where the “the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote . . . .” Republicans currently control 26 of the state delegations, the bare majority needed to win that vote. President Trump is re-elected there as well.
5. One last piece. Assuming the Electoral Count Act process is followed and, upon getting the objections to the Arizona slates, the two houses break into their separate chambers, we should not allow the Electoral Count Act constraint on debate to control. That would mean that a prior legislature was determining the rules of the present one — a constitutional no-no (as Tribe has forcefully argued). So someone – Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, etc. – should demand normal rules (which includes the filibuster). That creates a stalemate that would give the state legislatures more time to weigh in to formally support the alternate slate of electors, if they had not already done so.
6. The main thing here is that Pence should do this without asking for permission – either from a vote of the joint session or from the Court. Let the other side challenge his actions in court, where Tribe (who in 2001 conceded the President of the Senate might be in charge of counting the votes) and others who would press a lawsuit would have their past position -- that these are non-justiciable political questions – thrown back at them, to get the lawsuit dismissed. The fact is that the Constitution assigns this power to the Vice President as the ultimate arbiter. We should take all of our actions with that in mind.
Mr. Eastman recalled getting in touch with Mr. Pence’s legal counsel Mr. Jacob the next day about whether Mr. Pence could delay the certification.“I think Jacob was looking for a way for he and Pence to be convinced to take the action that we were requesting, and so I think he continued to meet with me and push back on the arguments and hear my counters, what have you, to try and see whether they could reconcile themselves to what the president had asked,” Mr. Eastman said.
|Welcome to the world of The Pomegranate|
Thank you, Martin Jan Månsson!