Ira 'Bluebeard Homer' Goldman
@kdbyproxy.bsky.social
I used to write laws… then I invented Knee Defender. ex-HPSCI, ex-Senate tech, taxes, trade/FP, ethics, antitrust… crime & even reputed parliamentarian
TODAY'S QUESTION: Would it be out of order while speaking on the floor of the House or Senate for a member to display this photo of President Trump at the Ford plant waving to an autoworker?
January 16, 2026 at 4:13 AM
TODAY'S QUESTION: Would it be out of order while speaking on the floor of the House or Senate for a member to display this photo of President Trump at the Ford plant waving to an autoworker?
So she showed up at the White House, White House says Trump accepted her Nobel only because she insisted, and then a staffer instantaneously pulled that frame and all out their butt?
January 16, 2026 at 3:09 AM
So she showed up at the White House, White House says Trump accepted her Nobel only because she insisted, and then a staffer instantaneously pulled that frame and all out their butt?
"Hey, Kristi. Over here!"
January 16, 2026 at 12:55 AM
"Hey, Kristi. Over here!"
Maybe in response to this. 🤷🏻♂️
January 16, 2026 at 12:35 AM
Maybe in response to this. 🤷🏻♂️
January 15, 2026 at 5:22 PM
For some current context... On the right, images of what Trump supporters call a "protestor uprising" in Iran – that Trump not only supports, but that he's encouraged, calling those Iranians "patriots".
January 15, 2026 at 4:51 PM
For some current context... On the right, images of what Trump supporters call a "protestor uprising" in Iran – that Trump not only supports, but that he's encouraged, calling those Iranians "patriots".
As drafted, at best it's an A-B wobbler, especially with "inappropriately" being such an attractive target for Repubs to attack.
The current charge in Art III is the sort that could have been joined with others, like House Judiciary did w/ Article 2 against Nixon. A modified limited litany.
6/
The current charge in Art III is the sort that could have been joined with others, like House Judiciary did w/ Article 2 against Nixon. A modified limited litany.
6/
January 14, 2026 at 9:25 PM
As drafted, at best it's an A-B wobbler, especially with "inappropriately" being such an attractive target for Repubs to attack.
The current charge in Art III is the sort that could have been joined with others, like House Judiciary did w/ Article 2 against Nixon. A modified limited litany.
6/
The current charge in Art III is the sort that could have been joined with others, like House Judiciary did w/ Article 2 against Nixon. A modified limited litany.
6/
Yes, Article III says she "violated" a rule against the "Misuse of Position", but when the bar is set at "high crimes and misdemeanors", can "inappropriately" clear it?
Also: Noem "violated [the rule] by using her position for personal gain *while* inappropriately using taxpayer dollars"? 🤔
4/
Also: Noem "violated [the rule] by using her position for personal gain *while* inappropriately using taxpayer dollars"? 🤔
4/
January 14, 2026 at 9:25 PM
Yes, Article III says she "violated" a rule against the "Misuse of Position", but when the bar is set at "high crimes and misdemeanors", can "inappropriately" clear it?
Also: Noem "violated [the rule] by using her position for personal gain *while* inappropriately using taxpayer dollars"? 🤔
4/
Also: Noem "violated [the rule] by using her position for personal gain *while* inappropriately using taxpayer dollars"? 🤔
4/
Such as – "Wherefore, Kristi Lynn Arnold Noem, by such conduct [etc]. Noem thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States."
Is such language necessary? No, but it should be there...
2/
Is such language necessary? No, but it should be there...
2/
January 14, 2026 at 8:36 PM
Such as – "Wherefore, Kristi Lynn Arnold Noem, by such conduct [etc]. Noem thus warrants impeachment and trial, removal from office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States."
Is such language necessary? No, but it should be there...
2/
Is such language necessary? No, but it should be there...
2/
Here's the Noem impeachment resolution introduced today by Rep. Kelly (D-IL). robinkelly.house.gov/sites/evo-su...
First take: I like that the three articles are specific and ~don't overreach.
Oddly (to me, anyway), the res doesn't include operative "Wherefore" language.
1/
4 of 10 ⬇️
First take: I like that the three articles are specific and ~don't overreach.
Oddly (to me, anyway), the res doesn't include operative "Wherefore" language.
1/
4 of 10 ⬇️
January 14, 2026 at 8:36 PM
Here's the Noem impeachment resolution introduced today by Rep. Kelly (D-IL). robinkelly.house.gov/sites/evo-su...
First take: I like that the three articles are specific and ~don't overreach.
Oddly (to me, anyway), the res doesn't include operative "Wherefore" language.
1/
4 of 10 ⬇️
First take: I like that the three articles are specific and ~don't overreach.
Oddly (to me, anyway), the res doesn't include operative "Wherefore" language.
1/
4 of 10 ⬇️
Judge Jeremiah Smith, US Circuit Court for the First Circuit
Feb 18, 1801: Nominated
Feb 20, 1801: Confirmed and commissioned
July 1, 1802: Service ends on account of circuit court judgeships ceasing to exist (Judiciary Act of 1802)
Length of judgeship: 1 year, 4 months, 8 days
1/
Feb 18, 1801: Nominated
Feb 20, 1801: Confirmed and commissioned
July 1, 1802: Service ends on account of circuit court judgeships ceasing to exist (Judiciary Act of 1802)
Length of judgeship: 1 year, 4 months, 8 days
1/
January 14, 2026 at 5:42 AM
Judge Jeremiah Smith, US Circuit Court for the First Circuit
Feb 18, 1801: Nominated
Feb 20, 1801: Confirmed and commissioned
July 1, 1802: Service ends on account of circuit court judgeships ceasing to exist (Judiciary Act of 1802)
Length of judgeship: 1 year, 4 months, 8 days
1/
Feb 18, 1801: Nominated
Feb 20, 1801: Confirmed and commissioned
July 1, 1802: Service ends on account of circuit court judgeships ceasing to exist (Judiciary Act of 1802)
Length of judgeship: 1 year, 4 months, 8 days
1/
"On purpose, you say?"
Yes, I say.
As Speaker, Mike Johnson was responsible for the ACA extender bill getting to the Senate correctly – ie, as it was passed by the House. But Mike Johnson also had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have that done incorrectly.
Do the math!!!
2/
Yes, I say.
As Speaker, Mike Johnson was responsible for the ACA extender bill getting to the Senate correctly – ie, as it was passed by the House. But Mike Johnson also had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have that done incorrectly.
Do the math!!!
2/
January 14, 2026 at 3:07 AM
"On purpose, you say?"
Yes, I say.
As Speaker, Mike Johnson was responsible for the ACA extender bill getting to the Senate correctly – ie, as it was passed by the House. But Mike Johnson also had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have that done incorrectly.
Do the math!!!
2/
Yes, I say.
As Speaker, Mike Johnson was responsible for the ACA extender bill getting to the Senate correctly – ie, as it was passed by the House. But Mike Johnson also had the means, the motive, and the opportunity to have that done incorrectly.
Do the math!!!
2/
The design of the House voting terminals doesn't help. They should spread the buttons out. Or at least put the "Open" light between Yea and Nay.
#HRules
#HRules
January 14, 2026 at 1:03 AM
The design of the House voting terminals doesn't help. They should spread the buttons out. Or at least put the "Open" light between Yea and Nay.
#HRules
#HRules
POLITICO: "Jack Smith to testify publicly before Congress next week"
#Trump #Jordan
www.politico.com/live-updates...
#Trump #Jordan
www.politico.com/live-updates...
January 13, 2026 at 8:29 PM
POLITICO: "Jack Smith to testify publicly before Congress next week"
#Trump #Jordan
www.politico.com/live-updates...
#Trump #Jordan
www.politico.com/live-updates...
The letter from the Clintons' attorneys is good, though here they left something dangling: Hillary doesn't recall ever "speaking to" Epstein; as for Maxwell, it says she "learned" about Maxwell's nephew being a campaign volunteer only because that was in Comer's letter – which says nothing…
1/
1/
January 13, 2026 at 8:07 PM
The letter from the Clintons' attorneys is good, though here they left something dangling: Hillary doesn't recall ever "speaking to" Epstein; as for Maxwell, it says she "learned" about Maxwell's nephew being a campaign volunteer only because that was in Comer's letter – which says nothing…
1/
1/
"Trump's disorientation problem? It's, it's bad."
"How bad is it?"
"It's so bad, Susie Wiles put a nameplate on his desk facing _him_."
🥁
"How bad is it?"
"It's so bad, Susie Wiles put a nameplate on his desk facing _him_."
🥁
January 13, 2026 at 6:00 PM
"Trump's disorientation problem? It's, it's bad."
"How bad is it?"
"It's so bad, Susie Wiles put a nameplate on his desk facing _him_."
🥁
"How bad is it?"
"It's so bad, Susie Wiles put a nameplate on his desk facing _him_."
🥁
TRUMP to ICE: Do it "legally" for ag and hotels. Otherwise, "legally" is optional.
January 13, 2026 at 2:39 AM
TRUMP to ICE: Do it "legally" for ag and hotels. Otherwise, "legally" is optional.
But you said motions to pass may not be amended. 😳
January 13, 2026 at 12:18 AM
But you said motions to pass may not be amended. 😳
You know what would make such "Notes" more impactful*?
An icon.
(* – a word I never use, but here for its affect)
An icon.
(* – a word I never use, but here for its affect)
January 13, 2026 at 12:11 AM
You know what would make such "Notes" more impactful*?
An icon.
(* – a word I never use, but here for its affect)
An icon.
(* – a word I never use, but here for its affect)
TIL:
> "Lord" may be used even when a woman has a post.
> Interesting organization/info at the member's page; first time I've seen one.
In the US, growing up, she would have been hit regularly with jokes about her name; maybe still would.
> "Lord" may be used even when a woman has a post.
> Interesting organization/info at the member's page; first time I've seen one.
In the US, growing up, she would have been hit regularly with jokes about her name; maybe still would.
January 12, 2026 at 11:53 PM
TIL:
> "Lord" may be used even when a woman has a post.
> Interesting organization/info at the member's page; first time I've seen one.
In the US, growing up, she would have been hit regularly with jokes about her name; maybe still would.
> "Lord" may be used even when a woman has a post.
> Interesting organization/info at the member's page; first time I've seen one.
In the US, growing up, she would have been hit regularly with jokes about her name; maybe still would.
It's hard to keep up sometimes.
January 12, 2026 at 11:20 PM
It's hard to keep up sometimes.
Very interesting, indeed.
January 12, 2026 at 7:16 PM
Very interesting, indeed.
"Look, if you talk about antisemitic views, there's been nobody better than us."
No matter the subject, Trump is always ready to claim he's better than anyone.
No matter the subject, Trump is always ready to claim he's better than anyone.
January 12, 2026 at 7:07 PM
"Look, if you talk about antisemitic views, there's been nobody better than us."
No matter the subject, Trump is always ready to claim he's better than anyone.
No matter the subject, Trump is always ready to claim he's better than anyone.
Is she an MP, or is she just miming?
January 12, 2026 at 6:56 PM
Is she an MP, or is she just miming?