PopJustice News Network (PJNN): U.S. Politics Channel

I saw a Tiktok earlier and they had an audio clip of a journalist asking Dianne questions such as "what has been the response from your colleagues since your return?" and she was confused and basically said something along the lines of "what return? I've been working. I've been voting" and they asked if she had been working from home and she said No, she's been working there...
Edit: Found the tiktok again, here ya go:

Every single working position in politics needs an age limit. Regardless of what side of the aisle you're on, We should not have all these old people running our country.
Last edited:
Can anyone with more familiarity with Senate rules confirm if this is a remotely valid take or just that of a contrarian for clicks?

Here’s an updated take that will undoubtedly draw some objections: Feinstein holding the seat until the election next year may be the most responsible thing she can do in case of one possible, albeit unlikely, scenario: a vacancy on the Supreme Court. In indulging her stubbornness, her ego, her paranoia—whatever we want to call it—Feinstein may be what stands between a 6-to-3 conservative Supreme Court majority tilting to a 7-to-2 position, or the key to it shifting back to 5-4. Either of those outcomes would be one liberals may regret not having taken more seriously.

The reason why Feinstein holds all this power is tied to her seat on the Senate Judiciary Committee. Democrats have an 11-to-10 advantage over Republicans on the panel, giving them zero margin for error in advancing President Joe Biden’s nominees for lifetime appointments to federal courts, including the Supreme Court. A tied 10-to-10 vote, at least under the current rules, leaves those nominees potentially stuck in limbo. Whenever she’s absent, Feinstein leaves Democrats on the committee with an insufficient 10 votes.

So one might argue that all that is more reason for Feinstein to resign, and let a younger, healthier Democrat take over her spot on the committee. But that’s not what would be guaranteed to happen. Even if Feinstein were to leave her seat early, allowing California Gov. Gavin Newsom to appoint an interim lawmaker until after the 2024 election, there is nothing ensuring that that successor could be the 11th vote on Judiciary. Committee assignments are part of the start of every Congress, and changes are subject to 60 votes if some lawmakers object and demand a recorded vote. That means 10 Republicans would have to allow Democrats to either send Feinstein’s replacement or another lawmaker into that role. There is scant evidence that Republicans would accede to that request.

Need proof? In April, the Senate considered Feinstein’s request that she be allowed to step away from Judiciary for a beat, and to allow another Democrat to take her seat. The effort, clearly heading to defeat, wasn’t even put to a floor vote. Even in a body known for its cordiality across party lines, Republicans saw the ability to confirm nominees to lifetime gigs in robes and wielding gavels as more important than courtesy to an ailing colleague. “We’re not going to help the Democrats with that,” Republican Sen. Joni Ernst of Iowa said.
Fellow Republican Sen. Mitt Romney of Utah was even more transparent about his party’s intentions: “I don’t think Republicans are going to lift a finger in any way to get more liberal judges appointed, so whether she’s resigned or leaves temporarily from the Judiciary Committee, I think we will slow walk any process that makes it easier to appoint more liberal judges,” he said.
Can anyone with more familiarity with Senate rules confirm if this is a remotely valid take or just that of a contrarian for clicks?

Jesus Christ that’s evil all around
What it suggests is factually untrue - deadlocked nominations (10-10) are just given to the Senate President to "discharge" to the floor of the Senate for a full vote (where again the VP is the tiebreaker in a 50-50 split).

This is how Judge Jackson was confirmed to the Supreme Court:

Feinstein's defenders were even first arguing that her absence had no impact on the committee, referencing that it had been working as intended by citing how many nominations had been confirmed since 2023 started.

The issue being that such discharges require a simple majority to happen, which can't be done for as long as Feinstein holds on to power in her rapidly declining health and is propped up by centrists who are doing everything in their power to stop a black female progressive from joining the ranks of the Senate.
Something about Musk's Trump comments and Hillary Clinton's Biden age comments tickle me... I'm not sure if it's giving sore loser who everyone laughs at while we face the most dreaded electoral re-do of all-time or corporate/state consensus on forcing through new figureheads...

Learning toward the former due to Tiny Meatball Pudding Fingers Ron and general HRC buffoonery
I know many of you feel black pilled about politics understandably, particularly federal politics, but I’m hoping that Minnesota’s tremendous progress showed what’s possible if we continue to support people at the state and local level, and move to elect younger more visionary politicians.
The issue is that Minnesota is evidence that progress is only achieved once demanding a certain purity test of elected officials and that voting blue no matter who does not work objectively as a means to change because party alignment does not correlate to progressive ideology.

You just have to look at how NYS Dems somehow lurched rightward and yet Minneosta's DLF has become the progressive standard with just a 1 person majority across their legislature.

That is why any heavy-handedness over those who are "blackpilled" is silly because everyone understand the importance of voting. The only people who don't understand the importance of voting are partisan centrist Dems in Congress purposefully ignoring the pulse of the party and thus choosing to lose.

Like yeah, every state should legislate and vote like Minnesota. To get there the DNC should probably mandate every state party is ideologically just like Minneosta.

Don't support gig workers having legal protections? Boom, not allowed to run as a Dem.
Don't support the legalization of marijuana? Boom, banned from being an elected Democrat.
Imagine the actual progress we woul see.
Republicans think every country wants to invade us so they bolster the military overseas without realizing the call is coming from inside the house. The biggest threat right now are the loons trying to destroy power substations and disrupting anything and everything people enjoy doing.
A lot of things piss me off, but the way the American public watched Eisenhower's farewell warning about the military-industrial complex with reasoned, steady concern... and then did nothing as what he warned about happened within record time. Whatever. Zooming out, it's pretty clear we're not going to change course before a force changes course for us.