In January 2020, the Donald Trump-led Justice Department formally declared that impeachment inquiries by the House are invalid unless the chamber takes formal votes to authorize them, which has not happened.

The FBI, DOJ, AG, and other government departments are bound by their still valid decision, so won’t be responding to any subpoenas until the full house votes for the inquiry.

This inquiry is going to be the freedom caucus alone in a room with no witnesses or evidence because their inquiry is not valid without a full house vote first. Hopefully the Democrats will put a babysitter in there to watch them so they don’t foment another coup attempt.

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/12/trump-doj-assist-biden-impeachment-probe-00115393#:~:text=In%20January%202020%2C%20the%20Donald,formal%20vote
s%20to%20authorize%20them.

Edit: even after caving and trying to start this illegal inquiry, McCarthy is still facing a removal vote from his own party, and has indicated he expects a government shutdown at the end of this month if Social Security and Medicaid aren’t cut drastically or ended completely. More proof Republicans can’t lead and are the worst possible stewards of the economy or nation.

A fascinating look at the factors leading up to the Brexit. "Race-baiting, Nationalism, and Fear" Sounds familiar. Seems to be a common theme in semi-successful election campaigns. We in Canada voted against that kind of nonsense in our latest federal election, thankfully.

I wonder, though, if the Brexit will actually happen? Will UKIP win the election for leadership of the UK? Are the other parties interested in stewarding Britain through the exit? I ask partly because I don't really know and don't have much perspective on the whole matter and am interested in your opinions of it.

Yes, and thanks Did he cop a penalty?(nvm, found it) At first glance it looked a bit cheeky, but on re-watching it just looked like a racing incident... and he says his braking point was the same as the lap prior, not that it persuaded the stewards

I dunno, I'm still not convinced. We aren't seeing what happened before though, and I'm assuming the inside car is the one doing the passing, which may not be the case. If you're passing someone on the inside and you're two wide in a corner, it certainly is your responsibility to leave room for the car you are passing. Though you could be right, it doesn't look to me as though the outside car turned into the inside car, and the driver certainly never would have done that intentionally because that would inevitably end in them both crashing (assuming this isn't a Prost/Senna sort of thing). Since they're both sweeping towards the outside, the way I see it, the inside car is the one that hit the car on the outside.

Granted, even in this scenario, the driver on the outside could and should have conceded the corner, but he isn't obliged to do so, and I certainly wouldn't have expected it on the final corner of the final lap of the race.

It will be interesting to see what the stewards say. Or said, I suppose they probably already said whatever and I can just google it.

edit: The Jalopnik link text seems to agree with my assessment, that it was the inside driver's fault if anybody is to be at fault.

No, but replacing one relatively ineffectual steward of the environment with one that proudly proclaims "I'm not a scientist" while also spending much of his time claiming he somehow knows that environmental scientists are all wrong is certainly moving in the wrong direction.

Well you know what cheating mongrels us Aussies can be when there's a sporting competition involved... like the infamous underarm ball - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_FnSfVSG6c

It's really the team and not the driver though. This year each car is required to be fitted with an FIA fuel sensor to ensure that they don't exceed the maximum 100kg/hr fuel flow. In this case, the team found that the sensor was reading a bit high, so complying with it would mean a loss of power... so they changed the ECU settings to ignore it and go with their calculated values instead. They had been told to use the readings from the sensor, but with an offset applied, but chose not to because they felt it was still inaccurate.

The basis for the steward's decision to exclude the car was that "it is not within their discretion to run a different fuel flow measurement method without the permission of the FIA"

I imagine that the basis of their appeal against this decision will be that they did not actually exceed the maximum, it was a sensor error that made it appear that they did so, and that they therefore gained no advantage.

My sources for this are mostly these two articles - http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/ricciardo-excluded-from-melbourne-result/ and http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/red-bull-confident-of-winning-fuel-flow-appeal/

Modern day, right wing Republicanism is fueled by religion, religion that has told it's practitioners that they are being persecuted and they are the ones to save them. Calvinism, Rousas John Rushdoony, Christian Reconstructionism and an honest belief that they are in the end times, and are actively pursuing the end times...
An intersting article showing just how messed up modern day Tea Party politics is, Ted Cruz’s Father Preaches That His Son Is An “Anointed King” Who Will Bring The “End Time Transfer Of Wealth”

The church leaders, Fox News and everyone else has them all messed up to such a degree that they ignore the fact Jesus said it was impossible for a rich man to enter heaven, that they have their rewards here on Earth; that they ware to help the needy and the poor; that they are to be stewards of the Earth; blessed are the peacmakers; to heal the sick; to pray in secret, not make a big show of it as many Republican leaders do; that only God knows the appointed time of Jesus' return... and that word appointed means something... it doesn't matter if all the signs are here, if it isn't that appointed time, then it isn't time. I've heard the argument made that things like climate change doesn't matter as God is returning soon anyhow... it doesn't even enter their minds that perhaps God's appointed time is 52,584 CE/AD, to them it has to be ending soon... The election of Obama proved it to them that we are in the end times (I've heard that too, or pray for the world to end soon)... this is the fatalism that is running rampant in the minds of those who are voting for the Tea Party right wing nut cases. They are denied special privileges, they claim they are being persecuted. They truly see themselves being in the end of days and they are doing all they can to self fulfill the prophesies (even if they don't realize they are doing so, though many do know)... even if it became undeniable tomorrow that not only was climate change real, but it was man made, they would just point to the Bible and find some prophesy that the Earth would be polluted in the end of days. They hear on Fox News and Rush and in the church, people they trust saying "if you really think about it...", "anybody with half a mind could clearly see..." or "if you think critically about it..." and then tell them what to think, so that they think they have logic on their side as well as God.

As VoodooV pointed out, they are willing to sacrifice their own plans and ideas if it is adopted by those they see as the opposition in order to continue their persecution complex and continue to sabotage things.

I like Ron Paul's stance on non-intervention. I like Ron Paul a lot.
But what he is saying on Syria and the convoluted power system there is simply not true. There are Al Kaida fighters on the sides of the rebels. However, there are also Hezbollah fighters on the side of the Assad Regime.
If America's stance on what asserts a terrorist group and what not holds true interpolitically they, by their own theory can not stand by passively and watch. America HAS to do something- they allready "invested" too much into the region to now sit back and not act. WHAT exactly this intervention should look like is the question and you can see the current adminsitration suffer with a good answer to it.
Don't listen to the currently popular theme of "Gas-weapons are just another way to kill people". If you think the deployment of poison gas weapons into a urban warzone is the same as just "regular" bombardment you have to seriously go and read up on how gas-weapons behave in an urban environment especially WHEN combined with regular bombardment.
The use of this weaponry is an absolute show stopper, which makes it a lot more painful to realize that the USA itself is using enriched Uranium munitions and clusterbombs) - Nonetheless- the USA not acting now would be like saying: "You might not be as powerful and omnipotent as we are, but go ahead since we take this so seriously that we trivialize it to start our own wars".

Does it have to be military intervention? Hell, no.
Can it be expensive? Hell, yes.

The Use of UEAE-weapons (undiscriminatory extended area effect weaponry- i.e. stuff which even gets into protection shelters and doesnt worry which ones) is like lining up and shooting an entire part of a town by principle. Kinda like a poor man's nuke and even if it was a ruse by the rebels- this certainly warrants the current drama.
The USA invaded Iraq because they thought that Sadam Hussein had these weapons (fabricated charges or not, thats what they started the war on) so what exactly would be the consequences now if America sits back?
John Steward said on the daily show that this is like 7 year old bullies fighting on the playground. The irony is that he is frightingly right.
Again, I am against military intervention but this is some serious stuff.

I remember that car. I miss the days when Jackie Steward was a commentator on the many (non-NASCAR)races I watched when I was young.

dr krauss has a good book... which exists and doesnt exist.

also in todays world:

"An outbreak of measles tied to a Texas megachurch where ministers have questioned vaccination has sickened at least 21 people, including a 4-month-old infant — and it's expected to spread further, state and federal health officials said. 'There's likely a lot more susceptible people,' said Dr. Jane Seward, the deputy director for the viral diseases division at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. ... All of the cases are linked to the Eagle Mountain International Church in Newark, Texas, where a visitor who'd traveled to Indonesia became infected with measles – and then returned to the U.S., spreading it to the largely unvaccinated church community, said Russell Jones, the Texas state epidemiologist. ... Terri Pearsons, a senior pastor of Eagle Mountain International said she has had concerns about possible ties between early childhood vaccines and autism. In the wake of the measles outbreak, however, Pearsons has urged followers to get vaccinated and the church has held several vaccination clinics. ... 'In this community, these cases so far are all in people who refused vaccination for themselves and their children,' [Steward] added. The disease that once killed 500 people a year in the U.S. and hospitalized 48,000 had been considered virtually eradicated after a vaccine introduced in 1963. Cases now show up typically when an unvaccinated person contracts the disease abroad and spreads it upon return to the U.S.""

The tension between steward and subdue...

Well, let's put it this way, in 50 years time when the sea comes and subdues most of the coastal land, when we run out of oil and our air is choked and toxic, when we face the real possibility of eating bugs instead of beef (insects have a much higher protein ratio for investment then cattle do) or pan-global starvation, you might want to think about which of the two is more important if you can pull your head out of your self righteous ass...

The bible talks about the sins of the father, well the lack of environmental concern these days is a sin and it will be visited upon our children.

Well, you mention the unborn, yet on the main the thinking in environmental circles is that we have too many humans and that the Earth is unable to support them. Therefore, abortion (over 70 million unborn children murdered in the US since the 70s) is to be embraced, and even more extreme methods of population control are not only openly pondered, but have resulted in mass sterilization programs which have been mercilessly implemented in third world countries. Here are some of the greater atrocities committed in the name of preserving "mother earth":

http://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-population-control-holocaust

Among the intellectual elite, human lives are reduced to being paid the same consideration as one might the lowly cockroach. Contrary to your assertion, it is the Christian who affirms the sanctity of life and the inherent value of every person, whereas it is the opponents of Christianity that affirm infanticide:

Dawkins approves of infanticide

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFWt9cj3uj4

If you would reread my prior comment, you will see that I am in agreement with @RFlagg that we should be good stewards of the Earth. However, the mania of the environmentalists is to devalue human life and subordinate it to their misguided notions of preservation. The sickness of this world is sin, and the only one who can cure it is God. This world will continue to degenerate until the Lord returns because it is in rebellion against its Creator:

2 Chronicles 7:14

if my people who are called by my name humble themselves, and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and heal their land.

I think there is some definite hyperbole in your statement but I agree with what you've said on the main. Christians are called to be good stewards and we have largely ignored that command. As a former hardcore environmentalist I have a first hand understanding of what the tension is on either side. On one hand, the thought process behind the environmental movement is that this is the only Earth we have, and we must zealously protect its treasures because they cannot be replaced. Once they're gone, they are gone forever. On the other hand, the thought process behind more than a few Christians is that this Earth was given to us by God, and we have dominion over it. There is no reason to worry about destroying it because God Himself will be destroying it upon the second coming of Christ. The Earth will then be recreated and it will be overseen by God going into eternity.

These points of view are exactly contrary to one another and can hardly be reconciled. For the Christian, the tension the bible gives us is between steward and subdue. We are not only instructed to be good stewards, but also to subdue the Earth. Environmentalists hate the very thought of that and would prefer that human interference in natural affairs would approach zero. In the extreme of environmentalist thought, human beings are entirely expendable and should be culled until they do not significantly impact the biosphere. This is of course is entirely foreign to the mind of the Christian, who understands that the very point of the Earth is to be a habitation for human kind. Christians on the main are much more interested in the welfare of other human beings rather than animals and see animals as expendable. An animal has no eternal destiny spoken of in the bible, but human beings do.

As to where I stand, I care about animals and the environment. The issue of global warming is irrelevant to me; it's a doomsday scenario with no teeth. Even if it is somewhat true, it is not how the world is going to end. But I do care and so do many Christians. I don't think we should just run roughshod over this world and inflict undue suffering on creatures to exact some kind of profit. Rather, I think we should intelligently manage our resources and distribute them equitably. I think we could probably learn a lot from the Indians who managed to live harmoniously with their environment. On the other hand, I am not against drilling or logging or anything else that environmentalists hate, within reason. Unfortunately, human beings are not reasonable creatures; they are sinful and greedy to exploit anything they can for personal benefit. There is irrational hatred on both sides, and they are both being played by the adversary. I know people on the inside of the environmental movement and the infighting that goes on because of the gigantic egos and hypersensitivity is almost comical. Most seem to be in it for their own glory and they get in the way of anyone who actually wants to make a difference.

Christians should be setting the example but some of what you're dealing with isn't born again, spirit filled people, but apostate, carnal Christianity. Around 80 percent of the country professes to follow the Savior, but when you ask very specific questions like are you born again, justified by grace, etc the number goes down into the 30's. This isn't an excuse but it is the reality.

I think part of it must have been cut off. Christians are the most anti-pro-environmental people around, they are the ones most defending the giant corporations fight against the science of climate change. Fox News and the Republican party say it is junk, so they say it is all junk. Which I find odd for the same reason Louis CK notes in the video, if He was real and came back, He'd be upset that they didn't take better care of the Earth. They seemed to have forgotten how good stewardship works... it wouldn't matter if climate change science was BS, taking better care of the environment would be the right thing to do from a Biblical perspective, yet many if not most don't care. I've been told, "It doesn't matter anyhow as Jesus is coming again soon"... as if that is reason enough not to be a good steward of what He apparently gave them to watch over... It just boggles my mind how far disconnected from any sort of logical thought train that the vast majority of them seem to be on... and I don't mean where it contradicts the Bible, but where logic would follow the Bible and yet is still ignored as the vast right wing media machine tells them to...

I would think that if the Bible says to be a good steward of the Earth and the right wing media machine and Republican party says profits matter more, then I'd question the Republican party and right wing media machine. I would think that if Jesus said the rich won't inherit the kingdom of God, that we were to take care of the sick and the poor and needy, and the Republican party and right wing media machine said, no, we need to let the rich keep more of the money they made by not paying their workers a living wage and punish those working for them by taking away benefits that help them survive, then I would question that message... oh wait, I did. Which is why I changed from a Republican to a Libertarian (defending Fox News and bashing evolution and the whole bit) and eventually to the Liberal I am today. Everything the right wing folks do in the so called name of God is in contradiction to the teachings of the Bible... save perhaps abortion, the solution of which isn't laws restricting it, but affordable health care and education, two things they are against providing...

The buzz surrounding this event seems to be headed down the road that led to further firearms on the ban list.

The Miasma from Chicago has always been in favor of gun control measures which do nothing to address causes but minimally treat symptoms and the whims of those who would control humans by eliminating choices along with personal responsibility. He's discussing it right now using fake tears and more than a few examples of the retarded logic that dystopiafurtdy here posted above. It's insulting both to my intelligence and sensibilities to be addressed by a U.S. President, like a blind child with down syndrome.

Cerberus Capital Management, a New York-based investment firm that that owns the largest U.S. gun maker Freedom Group (Bushmaster, Remington) is poised to sell, while stocks in Sturm, Ruger & Company has increased more than 700 percent (Smith and Wesson, 253% ) since Obama was elected in 2009. Not very wise stewards of those pensions for teachers, California!.....The same retarded ban on firearms in California happened back when I lived in San Francisco. One lone gunman walks into the 101 California Street building and kills a few peeps with a variety of guns and "BOOM!", people who don't know how to use a shovel properly, acting on emotions and severely compromised common sense,support bans on a whole spattering of guns, ammo, etc., because on-accounta it was so horrible and was apparently the gun's fault Now SOH Feinstein is at it again, another fractured piece of out-of-touch, privileged human pieces of garbage appealing to emotions rather than reason, and playing the game she was placed in position to play.

Dipshits?? No, same intentional, systematic plans like the Brady Bill and the National Assault Weapons Ban, a knee-jerk, and well-timed coup on individual rights relative to protecting oneself and family.

How about for STARTERS, "Anyone ever treated for mental illness or prescribed anti-psychotic or psychotropic drugs for the treatment of the same, can't even be around anyone with guns, much less purchase them. That would stop MOST of these random acts of carnage.

I won't even begin to mention in detail the amount of illegal firearms on the banned lists-to-date that are in the hands of drug dealers, pimps, gang members, etc. and the insanity of THAT subset of society, COPS, and SOLDIERS being the only people with that kind of monopoly on firepower. Fuck that shit. Time is nigh to becoming a criminal or expatriate.