David Hickson

Somewhere in a lonely hotel room there's a guy
Starting to realize that eternal fate has turned its back on him
It's 2 A.M.

[Sholdon Daniels @SholdonDaniels]

CNN investigated Nick Shirley instead of the actual fraud in Minnesota and California.

If that doesn’t convince you that they are not NEWs, but a Propaganda Machine, I don’t know what to tell you.

[David Hickson @dhickson_oc]

Do the idiots in the booth at @IndyCarOnFOX ever get sick of being WRONG? @AndrettiIndy @Hinchtown @townsendbell @temuleighdiffy

[Karoline Leavitt @PressSec]

Over a quarter-million noncitizens on the rolls: Why the SAVE America Act can’t wait

https://t.co/zUyewk4cMj

[Justine Bateman @JustineBateman]

You can hold two ideas in your head at the same time.
You can be pro-men and also anti-sexism.
You can be pro-women’s rights and also support trans people.
You can be pro-environment and against alternative energy fraud and waste.
You can have an allegiance to a political party and also be fiercely critical of any of their mismanagement.
You can support freedom of religion, but draw the line when that religion wants to fundamentally change the structure of the US.
You can support people with new ideas, and also tell them when their ideas don’t hold water.
You can also change your mind whenever you feel like it.

[David Hickson @dhickson_oc]

Our Town Bellevue? What a joke. Jackson County isn't in your viewing area @KCRG Just ask Joe Winters and his weather team

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

Let’s go!

Delay recess.

To SAVE America.

[Gunther Eagleman™ @GuntherEagleman]

Joe Biden hired eighty-seven thousand IRS agents, and not a single one of them found this Somali fraud.

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

My colleague from South Dakota suggests here that the talking filibuster hasn’t been used in a century, and that it was not used to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

He’s mistaken.

As I’ve explained to the entire Senate GOP on multiple occasions, the talking filibuster *was* used effectively to break the weeks-long filibuster mounted against the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Leader Thune and others point out that the Senate ultimately invoked cloture on the Civil Rights Act, and on that basis wrongly conclude that the talking filibuster was *not* the tool used to achieve that victory.

This argument ignores the fact that this is *how* the Senate closed a staggering 30-vote cloture deficit in 1964. After many weeks of fighting a losing battle, filibustering senators predictably started to lose their resolve to hold up the bill indefinitely, especially when they realized how hard they’d have to work to keep the effort alive.

So they started proposing and supporting amendments to the bill to make it more palatable and help them save face.

I still maintain that this is a viable approach that could work well—even better—in the context of the SAVE America Act, especially considering that the bill is less complicated and less controversial with voters than was the Civil Rights Act, and currently has a cloture deficit of only 10 votes—tiny compared to the 30-vote deficit faced by the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

My colleague also mistakenly suggests that Senate Republicans would have to vote to enforce the talking filibuster. That simply isn’t true; no vote is required for this step. All we need is a majority leader willing to announce that we’re getting on the bill and that we will continue to debate it until it passes—all with the understanding that if filibustering senators fail to show up to debate it, we can “call the question” and pass it with a simple majority.

That understanding, in turn, is what motivates the filibustering senators to show up and speak, but it’s also what naturally causes them to tire of the exercise after a few weeks, at which point they start looking for a face-saving off-ramp.

Finally, Leader Thune suggests that the talking filibuster would be thwarted by being “reset” every time Democrats offered an amendment. There’s a valid point in there, but it’s not a good reason not to invoke the talking filibuster. It appears he’s referring indirectly to paragraph 1(a) of Senate Rule 19 (the two-speech rule). While offering a new amendment can create a new question under longstanding practice, the September 25, 1986 precedent narrowed how rigidly the two-speech rule is applied by clarifying that many procedural actions do not count as speeches at all.

Particularly in light of that 1986 clarification, it’s been a long time since I’ve suggested we consider rigid enforcement of Rule 19’s two-speech limit as part of a talking filibuster strategy for the SAVE America Act. We don’t need it!

Nor was that rule aggressively enforced during the Senate’s consideration of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Majority Leader Mike Mansfield correctly focused on requiring actual debate from filibustering senators rather than looking for technical ways to shut the debate down.

To give credit where it’s due, I appreciate what Leader Thune said in this interview about the possibility of passing some iteration of SAVE America using budget reconciliation—a procedure in which there is no 60-vote cloture hurdle. I’ve been skeptical of this approach in the past, but I’m starting to believe the SAVE America Act has more budgetary features than I initially considered possible.

That said, reconciliation is fraught with all kinds of problems, challenges, risks, and uncertainties. Also, failure can be far too easy to blame on the parliamentarian.

I’m open to considering the reconciliation path, but we should make this decision with our eyes open. To do that, we need to separate fact from fiction when it comes to the talking filibuster.

[Catturd ™ @catturd2]

100% this.

[Karoline Leavitt @PressSec]

Only American citizens should be voting in American elections.

Pass the SAVE America Act!

[Brandon Gill @realBrandonGill]

Nearly every developed nation on the planet requires ID to vote and knows who wins their elections before they go to sleep. America used to be one of those nations-- until Democrats decided they couldn't win elections without foreigners and fraud.

[Rep. Nancy Mace @RepNancyMace]

OVER 250,000 non-citizens are illegally registered to vote in just FOUR states alone.

THIS is exactly why we need the SAVE America Act.

[ThePersistence @ScottPresler]

OH MY GOSH!

The House just voted 215-211 in favor of a special rules resolution,

which instructs for the text of the SAVE America to be attached to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA).

The House is doing its job.

@SpeakerJohnson is keeping his promise.

[David Hickson @dhickson_oc]

@IndyCar I'm not going to watch this trash again because the original broadcast was filled with sophomoric (sophmoronic) weiner jokes by the two Brads and the Dollar Store Leigh Diffey in the booth. Pretty classy @PenskeMedia

[Gunther Eagleman™ @GuntherEagleman]

@NYCMayor Tell your neighbors to not try and drive over ICE agents.

Simple fix.

[Justine Bateman @JustineBateman]

I am not aligned with any particular political party. But I am aligned with being an American and defending the kind of government we have here that has made this country possible.
The DSA platform is treason.

[Mike Lee @BasedMikeLee]

Share if you agree that the Senate shouldn’t take its August recess until it has passed the SAVE America Act.

[Sara Gonzales @SaraGonzalesTX]

I asked Senator Thom Tillis about his vote against the Save America act and whether it has anything to do with the money he’s receiving from industries who profit off of cheap illegal labor.

He was VERY mad about the question.

We deserve better than these America Last losers!

[DataRepublican (small r) @DataRepublican]

Hello Mr. Clinton,

I'm not going to extend to you the courtesy that your paragraph about lawfare extends to Trump supporters. Because I've studied enough of you, to know what you are truly about.

You were President during the post-Cold War sugar high. I have it thoroughly documented that you and your administration met with George Soros frequently, and in short term changed your policy positions to fit whatever George Soros proposed.

Which was: continuous military intervention all over the world. Starting with the bombing of Yugoslavia. You were the original neoconservative. Madeline Albright used "open society" phrasing in communicating your foreign policy documents. You are a part of the long string of failures of nation-building in the name of democracy, the Western interventions that resulted in millions of mass migrants overwhelming our borders, artificial famines, and us building the infrastructure that enabled China to take over the Africa continent and extract African resources for themselves.

But. Most of all. Those of us -- and there are a good deal many of us -- who have been ruined by lawfare. @GenFlynn sacrificed everything. @JeffClarkUS has had his life ruined and is still rebuilding. At the end of the day, only one President has been the subject of repeated assassination attempts and eighty-plus indictments - and it's President Trump. Not anyone in your orbit.

Seriously, Bill. What do you think when you see that a Democrat gets indicted by a grand jury, and a judge inevitably overturns that indictment on grounds that nobody has heard of? "Oh wow the judges are so wise and saw right through a jury of peers! And that wisdom coincidentally happens to always fall on party lines!" Give me a break.

Every single one of us on the right-wing side knows that when your side regains power, your side will turn the full might of lawfare on us. You will cheer on mass incarcerations. You openly brag about that. You even toe the line of threatening to jail current military members if they don't refuse orders from Pete Hegseth.

You are the evil one here. You cheer on the burning of our cities. You cheer on lawfare of Republicans. You never apologized for the millions of lives disrupted all over the world. You never say a word about the billions or even trillions of dollars that have been robbed by your friends through corrupt NGOs.

The fact that none of you are in jail, proves that we are the powerless ones here. You're just afraid that someone sees you for you who are, and you secretly know that image is ugly.