Pelosi now turns impeachment lite into impeachment weightless
So Nancy Pelosi has decided to delay sending the articles of impeachment to the Senate, and her fellow Democrats are supporting her in that – or at least pretending to support her:
House Democrats on Thursday are rallying behind Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) after she said she’ll delay the delivery of impeachment articles to the Senate in an effort to ensure a fair trial.
President Trump has urged a speedy trial in the upper chamber, and Pelosi’s allies argue that delaying the delivery of the articles will put pressure on Senate GOP leaders to call witnesses and seek more evidence surrounding the president’s dealings with Ukraine — steps Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has said he’ll not take.
Rep. Jackie Speier (D-Calif.), a member of the House Intelligence Committee, said Pelosi’s delay strategy made for “a very wise decision on her part.”
“I think it gives her leverage; it gives the House leverage in terms of making sure that it’s not going to be a kangaroo court over there,” she told reporters in the Capitol. “If, in fact, they intend to not be an impartial reviewer of the facts, then it becomes a joke. And we’re not party to a joke.”
This is just bizarre. I’ve heard analogies to the dog that chases the car and finally catches it but doesn’t know what to do with it. This is the Democrats’ idea of “leverage”? Why would the Republicans care if Democrats never send the articles to the Senate? Is this an admission on the Democrats’ part that a trial in the Senate would make Trump and the Republicans look good and the Democrats even worse than they look now? Or does it represent Democrats’ hope that they (and their buddies in the MSM) can spin this to suggest “The meany Republicans are so unfair!” after the US public has had a chance to see how unfair the Democrat-led proceedings were in the House?
As Ted Cruz says:
Or maybe it’s the Schrodinger’s Cat impeachment:
So I guess it's like Schrodinger's Cathttps://t.co/ctEe5tlSCM
— David Burge (@iowahawkblog) December 19, 2019
This is nothing short of bizarre. I don’t think anyone knows exactly what to think of it yet.
Roy Nathanson:
I think Pelosi got on this roller coaster ride because she thought it might be fun, but now she wants to get off and doesn’t know how.
The best I can come up with is they think this is going to work like a government shutdown and the media will run all these stories about impeachment, building pressure on the Senate GOP until it caves. What those stories would be or how they would pressure Republicans? I have no idea.
This really gets at the heart of the anti-Trump phenomenon. It’s not about policy. It’s not about morality. It’s not about politics. It’s about “We’re Better Than You So We Should Win No Matter What!” Facts don’t matter. Logic doesn’t matter. Reason doesn’t matter. The reality of the situation doesn’t matter. It’s about people who think they should and do have power losing their bearings when they find out they don’t.
Mike
This is what Trump Derangement Syndrome looks like, writ large. If the article of impeachment are, in fact, not delivered, then the impeachment hasn’t been legally consummated.
The Republicans (and Trump) are actually in a win/win here, and Pelosi, in her very Catholic heart, knows it.
Cruz is correct. Democrats are in a panic. The impeachment has not gone according to their hopes and hope is not a plan. They were unable to shake loose anything close to a smoking gun and hammering away at Trump with their MSM allies has moved the polls somewhat but in the wrong direction.
Democrats will have little control once a Senate trial begins and they have good reasons to fear what might happen there. It may look silly to halt the impeachment process, but the price won’t be too high to do so over the holidays — they can still send the articles after New Year’s — so in the meantime why not play for time to look for options and hope.
Given how Democrats have painted themselves into this corner, it’s not a bad tactic.
Also, I’m coming around to the idea that this is partly about the Supreme Court. If RBG is forced to step down, Democrats can argue that an impeached President should not be allowed to put a Justice on the Court. I’m not sure how effective that will be, but it’s something. Losing another Supreme is a disaster for the Dem agenda.
___________________________
I must say Edit has been pretty solid lately.
The argument that an impeached president should not appoint judges fails upon slightest inspection: Clinton appointed many federal judges in the last two years of his impeached presidency.
To be fair, he didn’t have a Supreme Court vacancy in 1999-2000. But regardless, if an impeached president can nominate vacancies to the DC Court of Appeals with no embarrassment or political impediment, I fail to see how an appointment to the Supreme Court can be hindered in the slightest. Democrats have themselves to blame for this precedent.
It’s all very delicious to me.
Say… didn’t this round of the Impeachment Follies start with the Democrats saying Trump’s crime was withholding something promised by a Congressional bill to gain leverage in a negotiation?
It strikes me that, in the long haul, they’re weakening their own case in more ways than one with this latest stunt.
I fail to see how an appointment to the Supreme Court can be hindered in the slightest.
Michael Towns: I don’t say it’s a good argument, much less a good legal argument, but it’s better than nothing. At the least it’s an emotional argument for the base and maybe some stray independents.
“Cool Hand Luke — Sometimes nothin’ can be a real cool hand.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDYyg0QskRo
The beauty of withholding the articles is that without a Senate trial, Trump can’t say he’s legally vindicated.
I will also add that, since judicial appointments are approved by the Senate alone, that this is not a subject matter that the house has any say on.
KRB
Huxley, I’d say that is the *only* benefit that Democrats get by withholding the articles from the Senate. But the costs — at least to me — seems to vastly outweigh this benefit.
It’s pretty cool to live in a world where a Schrodinger’s Cat simile can be used without explanation.
Though I’m not sure how we look in the box to see if the cat is alive or dead.
Jennifer Rubin has a piece in the Wash. Post offering some ideas on where Pelosi can go from here — here’s one of them:
I will also add that, since judicial appointments are approved by the Senate alone, that this is not a subject matter that the house has any say on.
Kae Arby: It’s not an argument from the House, but an appeal to voters and the Senate. It would be a sort of “Biden Rule,” which Biden argued in 1992 while in the Senate and on the Judiciary Committee:
It would be our pragmatic conclusion that once the political season is underway, and it is, action on a Supreme Court nomination must be put off until after the election campaign is over.
I’m not clear if the Biden Rule had any real force but Republicans mentioned it during the Merrick Garland controversy, when the Republican Senate refused to consider Obama’s lame duck nomination of Garland a month before the 2016 election.
Who knows? By next year, Bolton may have cashed in on his book deal, published his tell-all and supplied us with his firsthand account of Trump’s extortion plot against Ukraine. Or even more likely, Trump’s lawyer Rudolph W. Giuliani and his henchmen might have disclosed even more damning information putting Trump at the center of the scheme to force Ukraine to assist Trump’s campaign. –Jennifer Rubin
Ann: Re: Rubin — There must be a pony!
huxley:
You write “The beauty of withholding the articles is that without a Senate trial, Trump can’t say he’s legally vindicated.”
I beg to differ. If there is a Senate trial and he is found not guilty, and he claims therefore to have been “legally vindicated,” the Democrats will simply say it was a politically biased and therefore invalid vindication. But if the Democrats never send it to the Senate and it never goes to trial, Trump can claim the grounds were so weak, so biased, and so bogus that even the Democrats didn’t want the embarrassment of having to go any further with this. Isn’t that really the best vindication of all?
Smear and disappear? Or is it a form of pocket veto? (They wish.) Or do they have a new whistleblower in the wings? Having observed Schiff in action over the last two years, there can be no doubt that he’s feverishly cooking up some new gotcha plan.
Is Pelosi really in charge? I don’t think so. IMO, she’s doing the bidding of Nadler, Schiff, and the Squad – deranged Trump haters all. (We know Nancy doesn’t hate anyone. She told us so.)
Bizarro world is not too strong to describe this whole thing.
There IS NO Democratic Party to speak of. There is but a lumbering hulk stumbling in the wasteland, its direction controlled by whatever voice in its head is loudest at the moment.
There is no hope for them in the 2020 election. We have had only 3 one-term presidents in the last 100 years. Two of them, Hoover and Carter, presided over economic disasters. Bush 41 was more complicated but it was still 3 Republican administrations in a row. Trump has peace and prosperity and enthusiasms only approached by those inspired by Ronald Reagan. 2020 is the Democrat’s 1964 when the Republicans threw Barry Goldwater to the wolves to get rid of him once and for all. The nomination is a booby prize.
The leadership of the Democratic Party is superannuated. They are all in their late 60s or older. They lost more than 1,000 elected offices during the Obama administrations, wiping out the next generation of leaders.
They are left with a number of factions, from the racial to the ideological to the grifters and grafters to the interest groups. All fighting over the bones.
Trump can claim the grounds were so weak, so biased, and so bogus that even the Democrats didn’t want the embarrassment of having to go any further with this. Isn’t that really the best vindication of all?
neo: Not to my mind. That has its charms, but to it’s not as good as a real trial ending in acquittal. Your mileage may vary.
Again, I’m not arguing Pelosi’s latest wrinkle is a great choice, but it has its virtues in terms of the flexibility it offers and that the alternatives aren’t great either.
Aside from Democrats’ indisputable, visceral hatred of Trump — they call every Republican president Hitler, but they mean it with Trump — Democrats are suffering from the Fallacy of Sunk Cost.
They have gambled so much for so long and lost, they can’t give up now.
I had a friend who ran through $400,000 day-trading one particular index, every market hour of every market day for eight years. He was always sure he was just about to crack the code, so he couldn’t give up and he couldn’t give up until it was all gone.
All of the possible explanations remind me of Mulder going from episode to episode convinced that, “The truth is out there.”
huxley:
I never heard the term Sunk Cost, but that’s what’s being described in this joke.
To huxley on December 19, 2019 at 11:02 pm: yeah, the true mark of a community is what you can talk about without having to explain it.
You have to open the box, that is, have the trial.
On the gripping hand:
neo on December 19, 2019 at 11:32 pm said:
… If there is a Senate trial and he is found not guilty, and he claims therefore to have been “legally vindicated,” the Democrats will simply say it was a politically biased and therefore invalid vindication. But if the Democrats never send it to the Senate and it never goes to trial, Trump can claim the grounds were so weak, so biased, and so bogus that even the Democrats didn’t want the embarrassment of having to go any further with this. Isn’t that really the best vindication of all?
* * *
So — if Trump goes to trial and is acquitted, that means he is actually guilty; but if he doesn’t go to trial, and thus is neither acquitted nor convicted, that means he is actually innocent.
I can’t decide if that is more Orwellian or Kafkaesque.
Just for fun — or maybe not, since this reveals an incredible depth of ignorance.
And, I bet they never heard of sunk costs OR Schroedinger’s Cat.
https://www.redstate.com/nick-arama/2019/12/19/lol-some-liberals-thought-impeachment-meant-trump-would-be-gone-get-rude-awakening/
The rest is a bunch of tweets brimming with schadenfreude.
McCarthy delivers the winning koan.
https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/12/trump-impeachment-if-impeachment-articles-are-not-delivered-did-impeachment-happen/#slide-1
“….if Trump goes to trial and is acquitted, that means he is actually guilty; but if he doesn’t go to trial, and thus is neither acquitted nor convicted, that means he is actually innocent.”
Um, no.
Rather:
“….if Trump goes to trial and is acquitted, that means he is actually guilty; AND if he doesn’t go to trial, and thus is neither acquitted nor convicted, that means he is ALSO actually GUILTY.”
There, fixed it for you. (But still very much Orwellian AND Kafaesque….)
Never underestimate the need for the Democratic Party to avenge and to destroy (while claiming to be pursuing justice and trying to save the country).
And remember: with the MSM spinning Fast and Furious non-stop, the Democrats are firmly convinced that they will be able, by continuing to flood the airwaves (as it were) with Tales from the Narrative and continued wall-to-wall Trump/GOP demonization, to hold the president’s feet to the fire for as long as they want. As long as they consider it strategically necessary.
Forever…in their perfervid imaginations.
(They tell us that power corrupts…but what they don’t really tell you is that power, with no checks and balances—and the Democratic Party, along with its MSM cohort and the party faithful, has absolutely none of either—makes you insane.)
huxley on December 19, 2019 at 10:40 pm said:
…
Also, I’m coming around to the idea that this is partly about the Supreme Court. If RBG is forced to step down, Democrats can argue that an impeached President should not be allowed to put a Justice on the Court. I’m not sure how effective that will be, but it’s something. Losing another Supreme is a disaster for the Dem agenda
* * *
Hinderaker at PowerLine agrees with you & Mark Levin on that possibility.
https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/12/is-it-really-about-the-supreme-court.php
And now the dems are trying to render the word “impeachment” to be as meaningless as they have made so many other words.
The Democrats may indeed be worried about another Trump SCOTUS pick, because of this:
https://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/senate/475420-senate-confirms-13-trump-judicial-nominees-in-end-of-year-sprint
In his superb statement this morning, McConnell made the point that if the Senate accepts the articles voted by the House and proceeds with a trial, it will have forever lowered the standards of what constitutes an impeachment, with foreseeable and extremely harmful consequences to this nation.
I’m hopeful that Mitch is telling us that the Senate will reject the articles out-of-hand. The Deep State Media and the deranged Democrats will scream and howl, but who cares?
Dershowitz:
https://www.foxnews.com/media/alan-dershowitz-rebuts-laurence-tribe-unconstitutional-for-pelosi-to-delay-senate-trial-on-impeachment
Key graf:
“It is difficult to imagine anything more unconstitutional, more violative of the intention of the Framers, more of a denial of basic due process and civil liberties, more unfair to the president and more likely to increase the current divisiveness among the American people. Put bluntly, it is hard to imagine a worse idea….”
I’d guess that at this point no rank-and-file conservative cares what the leftist media says about anything and no Trump supporter cares that the left impeached him.
They’ve been promising impeachment since before he actually took office because reasons and now that they’ve actually done so I find it completely unsurprising that they still want to play pretend political games with it. They want to be able to tell their insane political base that yes, we did impeach the Demon Trump but the evil Senate that should be abolished thwarted our righteousness. But they also want to tell low-information voters who aren’t invested in Trump-hatred that no, we didn’t impeach him, we just expressed our opposition.
See, he’s still president! No impeachment at all! Vote for us, we’re not crazy!
Gosh, I just don’t think this is going to work. With their endless conniving to get Trump, they’ve dealt themselves a bad hand, and they’re managing to play it badly, too. To borrow from an earlier comment, I don’t think they’re going to ever find that pony, and they’re ruining themselves in the digging.
It’s awesome.
“offering some ideas”
Nothing but straight-up Dem propaganda. I’ve always known you’re a troll Ann. Have you and manju ever been seen in the same place at the same time? OK – maybe in the boiler room.
Feldman’s a fraud.
McConnell should inform the Chief Justice of the day the trial opens. The Chief Justice shows up in the chair, this gambit collapses.
A couple of points
I pointed out a couple of weeks ago I thought this was part of a denial tactic to stifle a supreme court nomination. I still think that. Unfortunately it comes at the cost of creating even more social upheaval when it happens.
Larry Correia had a good point about all this. To paraphrase: The left believes that the violence and protest is like a rheostat. It can be turned up and down as needed for pressure. The right believes its a toggle switch. Its either on or off. And when the switch finally gets thrown it will be very, very ugly.
Lastly it seems to me that the Democrats are trying to slowly and inevitably turn our government into a de facto parliament. The interstate vote compact to eliminate the electoral college was a recent attempt. But they have essentially turned impeachment into the equivalent of a “no confidence” vote. Something others have pointed out will now simply be a common occurrence. Whenever the President and House are held by different parties
The Dems were looking for the pony before, but are now afraid there is none. BUT they want voters to believe there is one. So, while still looking, they’re now are moving towards a more ad hominem demonization mode.
They are looking to create so much smoke, that the low-info uncommitted voters think there must be some fire.
They want the low-info voter to believe there’s a pony, with so much horse manure all around.
They don’t see any better way to win, and they’re all about winning.
It isn’t everything … it’s the ONLY thing.
NB, if we accept as valid the notion that the Senate cannot proceed with reference to an act of the House unless the Speaker ‘transmits’ it, we’ve given the Speaker an effective veto over federal legislation, which is nowhere in the Constitution. This whole business is just humbug. It’s time for the Senate Majority Leader and the Chief Justice to call bullsh!t.
That might have worked if the democrat/media complex had a higher approval rating than Trump.
Womp-womp.
Jennifer Rubin has a piece in the Wash. Post offering some ideas on where Pelosi can go from here — here’s one of them:
Ann, did it ever occur to you that there might be a reason Jennifer Rubin quit practicing law? One like irremediable incompetence?
I have no clue why you would quote Jennifer Rubin as an authority and expect to not be laughed at. She’s a shill hired by the Bezos Birdcage Liner to maintain the pretense of an Op-Ed page. (The Sulzbergers and PBS limit their investment in the bogus to hiring capons like Ross Douthat). Tell your handlers at Correct-the-Record to send you better talking points.
The Democrats’ brilliant idea: “Let’s all tattoo ‘BAD FAITH‘ on our foreheads! YEAH! That’s the ticket!”
It all depends on Mitch McConnell.
McConnell is doing his job well, making with the cheap talk to signal that he is employing a mixed-strategy:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.newsweek.com/mitch-mcconnell-impeachment-im-not-impartial-juror-this-political-process-1477817%3famp=1
Cocaine Mitch has the option of turning the Senate trial into a circus, with clowns Hunter and Sleepy Joe Biden made to perform under a blazing-hot spotlight in the center ring, whether they show up when subpoenaed or not.
Should McConnell risk the Senate majority by weaponizing the impeachment trial to strike a mortal blow against Biden? Is this a reasonable risk to incur at this point? Should he do it anywayz, for the lulz?
McConnell has said he will coordinate with the Trump defense. Does this mean he’s going to abuse the process like Pelosi/Schiff did? Probably not, but what if he does?
McConnell is in a position where he is legally entitled to stake out a maximally-partisan position. He probably won’t, but what’s the estimated cost of betting that he won’t… and then being wrong?
What’s the fall-out for the presidential field if he does decide to spit upon his hands, hoist the black flag and start slitting throats?
Will he just take an immediate vote to dismiss and then shit-can the articles of impeachment? Would that make the house look weak? Would it make the senate look crooked?
How does the C.B.A. shake out?
This is a tough one, for both sides; but I’m starting to doubt there will be an impeachment trial.
Perhaps Pelosi wants time to pray about her next course of action to defend the founding fathers as is her custom of devoutness.
Or maybe she is waiting for the Durham report’s release so she can achieve maximum distraction from its findings. It’s hard to decide between the two.
I no longer watch any broadcast TV so my information comes from written reports and transcripts of these current political events and I suspect a good deal of our nation, folks who will vote have been avoiding watching any of this current round of political theatre. Those who now have jobs in a vibrate economy are more concerned with what they will cook for Christmas dinner and they might be optimistic about the coming New Year for a change instead of Democratic Party words of gloom and doom and coming world extinction.
All the current news, to me, boils down these great Macbeth words of wisdom.
“Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.”
That’s it…………….
How about Mitch McConnell sitting right with “We have to read the impeachment bills to see what’s in them. All negotiations over the trial start after we get the bills.”
Boom. No impeachment bills, no impeachment trial planning.
Typical SJW leftist behavior: trample Trump’s rights in the House, demand fairness in the Senate.
They are doing a good job of teaching the world how to get along without the Democratic Party.
The president is now a figurehead and serves the House
The house is trying to control how the senate is run, or wont cooperate
They threaten to change the supreme court to favor them
They threaten the electoral college to insure their victories
They are changing X-mas songs the way Hitler and the Socialist Nazi party did
They wage race based division, the way the Socialist Nazi party did
They are preventing employment for equivalents to the Socialist Nazi party
They are running Democratic Socialists, the party of Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov (Lenin)
They have initiated gun controls violating federal and state constitutions
They pick winners and create losers..
They use children to push politics the way the Jugend were used
(causing the disbanding of other youth groups that were not in line)
and a lot more…
Welcome to the American Socialist Democracy, predicted in the 1980s and laughed at
Given education and other things under gleichschaltung, it is unstoppable and inevitable.
“The person who loves their dream of community will destroy community, but the person who loves those around them will create community.” – Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Liel? zivs mazo rij!
V?rna v?rnai ac? nekn?bj!
Nancy seems giddy, drunk with power. The triumphant look in some of the pictures; the bizarre shushing of her own Congresspeople as she announced the vote totals. It’s all a fantastic game, don’t give it away, we are scoring such a huge win!
No, no, Mother! I am Pentheus,
your own son, the child you bore to Echion!
Pity me, spare me, Mother!
But she was foaming at the mouth, and her crazed eyes
rolling with frenzy. She was mad, stark mad,
possessed by Bacchus. Ignoring his cries of pity,
she seized his left arm at the wrist; then, planting
her foot upon his chest, she pulled, wrenching away
the arm at the shoulder — not by her own strength,
for the god had put inhuman power in her hands.
…
The pitiful remains lie scattered,
one piece among the sharp rocks, others
lying lost among the leaves in the depths
of the forest. His mother, picking up his head,
impaled it on her wand. She seems to think it is
some mountain lion’s head which she carries in triumph….
Agave Happy was the hunting…
See, the whelp is young and tender.
Beneath the soft mane of its hair,
the down is blooming on the cheeks.
You praise me now? [Pentheus]
will praise his mother. She caught
a great quarry, this lion’s cub….
I have won the trophy of the chase,
a great prize, manifest to all.
…Men of Thebes, behold the trophy of your women’s
hunting! This is the quarry of our chase, taken
not with nets nor spears of bronze but by the white
and delicate hands of women….
Now, Father,
yours can be the proudest boast of living men.
For you are now the father of the bravest daughters
in the world. All of your daughters are brave,
but I above the rest.
The Nation is threatened!
The Republic is at Risk!
The Whole Earth is in Dangerous Straights!
The Human Race itself is close to Extinction!
The President must be removed IMMEDIATELY!
But first … we’re going on holiday.
If you get the chance, do view clips of Nancy that are going around.
She waves her hands.
She mumbles incoherently.
She searches for words and falls silent in frustration when she can’t dredge them up.
This person is high (third?) in the line of succession to the Presidency. Scary …
Schrodinger’s cat reminded of an interesting article that linked it to P vs NP problem in math. It addresses the macroscopic quandary associated with this paradox.
https://science.slashdot.org/story/14/04/04/1610237/p-vs-np-problem-linked-to-the-quantum-nature-of-the-universe
One of the greatest mysteries in science is why we don’t see quantum effects on the macroscopic scale; why Schrodinger’s famous cat cannot be both alive and dead at the same time. Now one theorist says the answer is because P is NOT equal to NP. Here’s the thinking: …….
Agree with Art Deco, since I recommended that McConnell convene the trial on 12/26 (do it in the afternoon so his colleagues don’t have to travel Christmas day), and invite the Democrats to present their case. Or don’t if they have no case.
I don’t know anything about Quantum Physics, but I do know that the nation has figuratively passed through the looking glass.
And I do know that arguing that an organization should keep doing what they have been doing because “sunk costs” are no longer relevant–or maybe you can even recover some of them– can be a good move, or it can lead to real disaster depending on circumstances. Democrats would do well to review their circumstances and see if they can escape this madness.
Haiku:
Impeachment phoney –
Light or a pony or worse:
It didn’t happen.
Is this not Obstruction of Congress on Speaker Pelosi’s part? Not to mention a violation of the President’s civil rights to a speedy trial.
Barry Meislin mentions the PJM Dershowitz piece which says that Laurence Tribe is apparently the legal genius behind Pelosi’s Choice to impeach but not try:
Pelosi based her decision undoubtedly on the views of Laurence Tribe. As Dershowitz explains in his op-ed, Tribe has proposed that the Senate not conduct a trial — not now, and perhaps not ever. He advocates only launching the Senate trial if the Senate agrees to change its rules or until, there it is, of course, Democrats take over the Senate after the next elections (or after that, or after that). If both of those conditions don’t happen, well, “the impeachment would stand as a final and permanent condemnation of President Trump.”
https://pjmedia.com/trending/alan-dershowitz-on-pelosi-withholding-a-senate-trial-its-difficult-to-imagine-anything-more-unconstitutional/
So … Laurence Tribe wins the 2019 Bill Ayers award for Insidious Leftist Mastermind. Hands down.
Jonathan Turley is polite and annoyingly collegial. He shoves the stiletto into Feldman here:
https://jonathanturley.org/2019/12/20/trump-was-impeached-a-response-to-noah-feldman/
Andy,
That’s an interesting argument about the cat paradox. And it’s certainly true that macroscopic systems are much more complex and that many systems interacting add to the problem of which wavefunction is collapsing. However, I don’t think it’s the real issue. The real cause, to me, is that the value of h is 6.6 x 10 -34 Jsec. If Planck’s constant was larger, say on the scale of 10-5, then QM effects would be very noticeable. Same for the speed of light. If c was 100km/hr, we would be seeing time dilation and length contraction all over the place.
There’s an interesting calculation that can be done with quantum tunneling, which is observed regularly at the atomic level. We even have a piece of technology, the scanning-tunneling microscope, that uses the phenomenon. Calculate the time it would take on average for a person to throw a tennis ball through a wall if they throw a ball once a second. Utilizing the normal QM tunneling equations one comes up with a time greater than the age of the universe. A macroscopic QM effect we never see. And it’s all due to the value of h.
Prosecutors prepare to bring cases to trial, and then withdraw them all the time. The usual reasons (that I know): The defendant plead out; the defendant was so intimidated that they plead out; the prosecutor’s case fell apart; the prosecutor never had a case and the defendant called the bluff.
McConnell should speak every day the Senate is in session: “We’re still waiting for Nancy to bring her pathetic impeachment case over here so we can expose it.”
Jennifer Rubin’s piece supports the idea that the Dems are praying for a dismissal in the Senate. But they can’t dismiss something they don’t have?
_____
I like the SCOTUS Ginsberg angle. I hadn’t heard that one, and I think it’s a solid motive even if it BS at its core.
_____
I like huxley’s and mythx’s thinking. It’s mostly about timing. One aspect is stretching the time line. The longer things are spread out, the longer the media stays energized and it occupies more news cycles.
And Greg got my other thought: They will wait for a bombshell from Barr or Durham and suddenly the Senate trial prep will begin (sucking all the air out of the room). This last is my #1 favorite motive.
_____
Andy,
There are lots of macroscopic manifestations of quantum effects, even though you will never trip over one walking down the street.
The heat capacity of many solids (quantized vibrational phonons), superfluidity, superconductivity, the magnetic levitation of superconductors via the Meissner effect, the photoelectric effect (Einstein’s first Nobel), and black body radiation. That’s almost a history lesson on the early years of modern physics and the golden years of physics in general.
Just putting this out there. If Dems refuse to submit the articles until after winning the Senate in 2020, there WILL be serious political violence as a result. Maybe not immediately but tell 60+ million Americans that the game is rigged to that extent and enough will decide to flip the game board over.
Mike
Sorry physicsguy I didn’t see your post while I was typing.
Bose-Einstein condensation. Trillions of atoms or electrons (Cooper pairs) all moving in wavefunction concert. It’s magical (low temperature) stuff.
I think it depends on the quantum dominating the thermal energies. h-nu energy compared to kT thermal energy.
While Ms Pelosi does want the voters to hear the word “impeached” for the next 11 months, she does not want them hearing the word “acquitted”.
huxley,
One thing that I neglected to add (it was late and I wanted to go to bed) was that as long as the Repbulicans hold the senate they may, or may not, invoke the “Biden Rule” or any variations on their own accord; pressure from the house/Nancy Pelosi will not push them one way or the other. On the other hand, if the Democrats gain a majority (even a slim majority) in the Senate, they will simply not approve any further apointments from Trump; rendering the Biden Rule moot.
The only way I can think that Pelosi can exert any influence on the Senate is if Mitch McConnell loses his re-election bid next year and a Vichy Republican assumes the leadership role.
KRB
“The left believes that the violence and protest is like a rheostat. It can be turned up and down as needed for pressure. The right believes its a toggle switch. Its either on or off. And when the switch finally gets thrown it will be very, very ugly.”
I recall reading that at Larry’s site, in a very interesting comment thread. Ponder the toggle switch analogy in the context of the Civil War. The country went from what seemed like business as usual to bloody, brutal conflict in a few months, which approximately no one expected.
I also recall reading- long ago, in a book made out of actual trees and not merely displayed on a screen- an anecdote about the North, prior to the beginning of that conflict. That is, that the South never understood how much the North crucified its conscience to tolerate the existence of slavery. But the North had to, because Law, until it suddenly wouldn’t.
I find it quasi-analogous today, in that the left continually assaults us with importunities which we must tolerate, because Law, yet they also have made it fully known that they are in no way restrained by such silliness.
The lesson has been learned, I think. Otherwise their relentless attacks against the Demon Trump would have already prevented him from becoming president.
But yet that toggle switch still hasn’t been thrown. I hope it won’t, because I agree that it will be terribly ugly.
With reference to the idea that the house can hold the impeachment for the 2021 Senate: I thought that bills not acted upon by the end of a particular Congress die. They’d have to go through the impeachment again, and the gamble that they’d have 60 Democratic senators is a pipe dream.
At the moment, Pelosi has turned an impeachment into a censure by not passing the articles on to the Senate.
Kai Akker on December 20, 2019 at 9:53 am said:
…
No, no, Mother! I am Pentheus,
your own son, the child you bore to Echion!
Pity me, spare me, Mother!
* * *
The Bacchae is a shrewd analysis of humanity.
I was the producer/director for a college production (also did Lysistrata).
A couple more relevant quotes from that old dead white guy.
“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”
? Euripides, The Bacchae
“Cleverness is not wisdom.”
? Euripides, The Bacchae
“Do not mistake the rule of force
for true power. Men are not shaped by force.”
? Euripides, The Bacchae
Tiresias:
“There is no cure for madness
when the cure itself is mad.”
https://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/1842204
https://www.shmoop.com/bacchae/madness-quotes.html
Thread winner:
Doug Purdie on December 20, 2019 at 2:47 pm said:
While Ms Pelosi does want the voters to hear the word “impeached” for the next 11 months, she does not want them hearing the word “acquitted”.
Hah – serendipity at work!
https://jonathanturley.org/2019/12/20/trump-was-impeached-a-response-to-noah-feldman/comment-page-2/#comment-1907003
mespo727272 says:December 20, 2019 at 5:44 PM
Honoring this charade with scholarly analysis reminds me of the words of Euripides: “Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”
? The Bacchae
BONUS:
https://babylonbee.com/news/unbiased-wapo-launches-fireworks-as-trump-impeached
So, what happened to the “existential threat”? Or the “immediate need to end this threat to our democracy”?
I guess EggNog and Rumballs are far more urgent matters now for the Demarxists. Impeachment is just SO yesterday.
Andy on December 20, 2019 at 10:49 am said:
Schrodinger’s cat reminded of an interesting article that linked it to P vs NP problem in math. It addresses the macroscopic quandary associated with this paradox.
https://science.slashdot.org/story/14/04/04/1610237/p-vs-np-problem-linked-to-the-quantum-nature-of-the-universe
* * *
I confess to having only the vaguest idea what that was all about, but I do know that I will never impeach a president who does this:
https://science.slashdot.org/story/19/01/24/1720235/trump-offered-nasa-unlimited-funding-to-put-people-on-mars-by-2020-report-says?sdsrc=popbyskid
Which then pulls an excerpt (the center section) from here, leaving out the best parts IMHO:
http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/trump-offered-nasa-unlimited-funding-to-go-to-mars-by-2020.html
Wikipedia says the Mars plan is still on the NASA timeline. Sad.
But we did get the Space Force and Command!
As the clock ticked down, Trump “suddenly turned toward the NASA administrator.” He asked: “What’s our plan for Mars?” Lightfoot explained to the president — who, again, had recently signed a bill containing a plan for Mars — that NASA planned to send a rover to Mars in 2020 and, by the 2030s, would attempt a manned spaceflight. “Trump bristled,” according to Sims. He asked, “But is there any way we could do it by the end of my first term?”
I told you Trump is a Martian. Wake up, sheeple!
For those who are wondering if they have wandered into the Twilight Zone:
https://www.thenewneo.com/2019/12/20/frances-rampant-anti-semitism/#comment-2471765
huxley on December 21, 2019 at 12:10 am said:
It’s not well-known but Martians have visited Earth, mated with Earth women, and left offspring behind in Budapest:
The Hungarian scientists were seemingly superhuman in intellect, spoke an incomprehensible native language, and came from a small obscure country. This led to them being called Martians, a name they jocularly adopted.
The joke was that Hungarian scientists are actually descendants of a Martian scout force which landed in Budapest around the year 1900, and later departed after the planet was found unsuitable, but leaving behind children by several Earth women, children who all became the famous scientists.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Martians_(scientists)
“Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish.”
AesopFan — Quite a coincidence, to see that repeated! But not a coincidence at all, really. Isn’t it interesting how often we turn to the Greeks at these moments?
I hope the conclusion of The Bacchae arrives quickly.
O Father, now you can see
how everything has changed. I am in anguish now,
tormented, who walked in triumph minutes past,
exulting in my kill. And that prize I carried home
with such pride was my own curse.
AesopFan: It’s “The Man Who Fell to Earth” all over again.
Eccentric billionaire turned celebrity attempts to leverage his power and wealth to return to his home planet.
But the Swamp won’t let him.
huxley – I read that book for the first time back in 2015.
Obviously, my id was surreptitiously preparing me for the coming Trumpocalypse!
AesopFan: I read the book after seeing the movie. The movie was queasy-making in spots, but David Bowie was one of the most perfect casting choices in Hollywood history.
A friend saw it with a guy she had recently started dating. In the film David Bowie (the alien, of course) takes off his disguise and reveals to his human lover that he is an alien. She freaks out. As it happened, after seeing the film, my friend’s lover revealed to her that he was a male dominant.
She attempted to make light of it, “You mean, whips and chains?”
He said, “Not chains…”
And that was the end of that budding relationship.
I’ve wondered if the guy planned his reveal in the context of the film or whether it was really questionable timing.