News Burst: June 25, 2017 (Patreon)

Hi!

I hope you all enjoyed your weekend! I just finished uploading tomorrow’s video, which, as I promised last week, will be returning to history and away from politics and contemporary coverage (which was hard for me to do, since something happened that I wanted to a video on… but I may just do the video on Thursday instead). As always, the video goes live at 9a PT. I hope you all enjoy it!

This month is almost through, so for those of you who -- at the appropriate levels -- haven’t received your postcard or thank you video, a handful of each have yet to go out. So stay tuned for those. As far as signed Tweets, those have all long been out, so if you haven’t received yours yet, reach out to me privately. (Indeed, that goes for anything. If you haven’t received something your level of support should have gotten you, please don’t hesitate to tell me so I can look into it and, if necessary, make it right. Just remember that rewards are latent by one month.)

Okay, enough chatter. Let’s jump on in!

Is Justice Kennedy About to Retire?: http://www.politico.com/story/2017/06/25/justice-kennedy-retire-supreme-court-239940

My Take: It was just a few months ago that Donald Trump got to install a new Supreme Court Justice to the court in the form of Neil Gorsuch, and he might already have another one to replace in short order. Before we go any further, it’s worth noting that I thought it was wrong, improper, and systemically dangerous for the Senate to refuse to endorse President Obama’s nomination of Merrick Garland. In fact, one of the first episodes of Colin’s Last Stand was all about it. The Gorsuch pick should have been Obama’s, and Garland should be on the court. There’s no doubt about that.

That said, what happened happened, and Gorsuch -- a moderate conservative -- was a good (and many would argue perfectly reasonable) pick to the court. Now, rumors are swirling that 80-year-old Anthony Kennedy is mulling his own retirement, a natural notion considering his advanced age. There’s much anticipation surrounding an imminent announcement at the end of the Supreme Court’s current calendar, which is tomorrow, so we could learn more this week. Kennedy, though, is somewhat of a surprise, considering he’s not even the oldest Justice. Ruth Bader Ginsberg, who is fucking 84, is still somehow going strong.

Either way, these are dangerous times for Democrats. The numbers aren’t in their favor. Kennedy was nominated by Reagan and is therefore a conservative, but he’s really a total centrist, and has voted with the liberal justices over the years many times. Why it’s most dangerous for Democrats, though, doesn’t only have to do with conservatives shoring up the court. Kennedy, Ginsburg, and Breyer -- three reliably liberal justices -- are all very old, the three oldest members of the court by a long shot. It’s entirely possible Trump will replace all three of them by 2020. And if he wins reelection in 2020? Forget about it. The court will be 7-2 conservative for a good, long time if that happens, and perhaps even 8-1. This is absolutely worth keeping an eye on.

(Related Story | Trump’s Overwhelming Effect on the Courts: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-judicial-nominees-federalist-society_us_59497166e4b04c5e50256f0c?ncid=inblnkushpmg00000009)

Democrats to Leadership: Shut the Fuck Up About Russia: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/339248-dems-push-leaders-to-talk-less-about-russia

My Take: We’ve been collectively talking about this for a while, now, about the risk-reward gambit the Democrats have employed when it comes to Donald Trump and Russia. My opinion has long been that they’re playing a losing hand, and that they are far too eager to put all of their eggs into one basket, a basket with unknown contents that could potentially blow up in their faces. It appears that rank-and-file Democrats are starting to feel the same way, and according to this story, they’re desperate to get away from the Russia chatter.

Now, I’m in full agreement with many of these Democrats on multiple issues relating to the Russia-Trump nexus. For starters, it’s important that we find out the truth behind all of the accusations and innuendo. It’s essential that we know what happened, and, if anything did happen, make sure those involved are punished to the fullest extent of the law. But I likewise agree with their sentiments that, at the end of the day, no one really gives a fuck. This is a distraction, not only for Americans, but for Congress, who is notoriously glacial, and becoming more so with each passing term.

The Russia-Trump story really is the absolute epitome of the “shit or get off the pot” adage. I truly believe that the more time that passes, the more likely it is nothing is uncovered, and as I’ve said in the past, this reeks like a witch hunt. With all of the leaks about literally everything, you’d have to assume this would leak, too. Then again, I can’t know for sure. We should all worry more about what’s real and what’s true than what’s politically advantageous. I know that’s a lot for us to ask of our friends on both sides of the aisle, but if anything, Russia-Trump is perfectly emblematic of the divides in our government (and in our country).

(Related Story | CNN Fucks Up Russia Story: https://www.buzzfeed.com/passantino/cnn-russia-coverage-publishing-restrictions?utm_term=.bmmZdRNRm#.ewvDA6Q67)

Amending the Constitution: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DWtO2MHO-kE&ab_channel=IntelligenceSquaredDebates

My Take: I want to end today with a video that I watched just a couple of days ago, a video that’s part of the Intelligence Squared debate series. First of all, these debates are great. If you haven’t watched them, you definitely should make the time to. Just go to their YouTube channel, subscribe, and browse away. There’s a lot of good stuff there (including the recent Wal-Mart debate, which I really enjoyed, and found super thought-provoking).

Anyway, the reason I’m bringing this video to your attention isn’t only because it’s fascinating, but because I’m planning to do some videos in the future on Constitutional Amendments. Not ones that have already happened, mind you, but ones that I think should happen. I won’t get into what they are specifically, but I’ve identified five, and I think I want to do five different videos, one per topic, going into why I feel so strongly about these particular amendments. Some are common sense, but a couple are super radical, and I’d be interested to hear your thoughts when the time comes.

In the meantime, this debate focuses around the Constitution’s Article V solution to amending the Constitution, which is to call a meeting of the states, as opposed to going through the more standard process of Congress Amending the Constitution and the state legislatures signing-on. The most fascinating -- and frankly scary -- open question in regard to this has to do with the Pandora's Box we could potentially be opening by even entertaining massive changes to the Constitution, and who would be in charge of making those choices. I won’t spoil the video for you any further, but give it a listen if you’re so inclined.