Beirut Surveys the Damage – and Searches for a Cause – After Explosion Kills at Least 100

An official with the Lebanese Red Cross said at least 100 people were killed and more than 4,000 were wounded. The official, George Kettaneh, said the toll could rise further
Lataa lisää
Lue koko artikkeli aiheesta: time.com
Celtics' Jaylen Brown shows maturity, leadership beyond his 23 years: Basketball 'just a glimpse' of who he is
Don't just view Celtics forward Jaylen Brown as one of the NBA's best young players. As his coach says, basketball is "just a glimpse" of who he is.        
Republicans Mitch McConnell, Kevin McCarthy Skip Ruth Bader Ginsburg Ceremony Despite Invites
It is rare for members of the Big Four—the top leaders in both chambers—to miss such historic and significant ceremonies at the Capitol, particularly for those who lie in state.
'Yu-Gi-Oh! Duel Links' Zexal World Release Date, Cards & More Revealed
Yuma's ace monster Number 39: Utopia will be the cover card for the upcoming main box.
 Why art matters at the end of the world
Zac Freeland/Vox Art does not have to be political satire to help us reckon with the world. It’s difficult to think about art during an apocalypse. That’s one of the ideas I keep coming back to as the Vox Book Club continues on. Or more precisely, it is difficult to treat art as though it is worthy of attention during an apocalypse. I think that reading books and thinking about them and talking about them is important and valuable. I think it is important and valuable regardless of how horrible the rest of the world is. But sometimes I am caught up in the easy cynicism of letting them feel trivial. Sometimes I am tempted to say: Well, if we’re going to be wasting our time and attention on books, shouldn’t we at least make sure they are topical? As if the novel is inherently valueless, and the only way to redeem it is to think about it in relation to our current political catastrophe. This September, the Vox Book Club is reading Elif Batuman’s The Idiot, which I read primarily as a book about language and meaning. And writing up our last discussion post, which gets into an esoteric little riff on semiotics, I found myself falling into that state of defensiveness. This is an election year, a plague year, a year of police riots and fire, and I am devoting my critical resources, my platform, to thinking about language and emails and fictional college students? Surely there are more important things I could spend my time on. So I want to make some space here to talk about why I wrote that post anyway, why I chose The Idiot to begin with, and why I don’t want to only ever write about books in terms of how they fit into the current news cycle. I want to talk about why art that is explicitly not about the state is valuable. I also want to talk about why it is valuable to read art without reducing it to its relationship to the state. The New Republic’s culture critic Josephine Livingstone wrote an essay shortly after Donald Trump’s inauguration in 2017 that I’ve thought about a lot in the years since. That was a moment in which it felt as though any work, any intellectual effort that wasn’t bound up in the effort to resist Trump, was worthless, and the only way to write about any piece of art — book, movie, TV show, podcast — was to say it was the Art We Needed Right Now. It was Perfect for the Age of Trump. It would help Explain Life in Trump’s America. Livingstone argued specifically against treating art as an especially handy way of understanding Trump and his presidency. She argued that it was most valuable instead to approach art by imagining a zone “staked out for a variety of ideas and postures to flex and interact.” This zone, Livingstone continued, “is the place where the arts play. It is not an apolitical place, it is just not owned by government. In this aesthetic space, the arts explore a less confined politics than the one that controls the state. The state is not the beginning, end, or the reason for this space.” Under Donald Trump’s leadership, the only coherent way to discuss American politics is to discuss them in terms of Donald Trump: what is possible under his administration, what he is trying to do, what his failures are, what’s happening in secret, who is pushing back against him, how likely it is that resistance will matter. Trump warps the fabric of reality around himself, and he would like to warp the fabric of our minds, too, until he becomes the only thing we can think about, until he is at the center of our thoughts and all our most powerful aesthetic ideas. Art is a space outside of the political landscape that Trump has built. It does not have the boundaries or the contours of the state. It is a discrete entity, and its relationship to the state can be much richer and more complex than merely attempting to render the state into the terms of the aesthetic, to explain or to subvert or to render glorious through propaganda. Art does not have to be What We Need to Understand Trump in order to be worthwhile. It can be valuable in its own right — not apolitically, because all art contains political content, but without the concerns of the state becoming the central concern of the art. In an essay in n+1 in 2006 — four years before she would publish her memoir Possessed and 10 years before The Idiot — Elif Batuman developed a definition of sorts for the novel. “A novel says, ‘I looked for x, and found a, b, c, g, q, r, and w,’” Batuman wrote. “The novel consists of all the irrelevant garbage, the effort to redeem that garbage, to integrate it into Life Itself, to redraw the boundaries of Life Itself.” And that statement of purpose holds for The Idiot. What makes The Idiot so good, the place where both the humor and the sorrow lie, is in the accumulation of its main character Selin’s observations as she watches “all the irrelevant garbage.” It’s in the quality of her thought as she thinks about the social rituals of college, of email, of buying clothes and traveling and journaling and flirting. What she is watching is mostly petty trivialities, and the power of the novel comes from Batuman’s ability to render those trivialities worthwhile. And of course it’s political, too. Selin has thoughts about gender and colonialism; she is specifically a Turkish American character navigating mainstream American culture and forming relationships with other bicultural people. Even the language stuff can be read politically because politics is built out of rhetoric, out of words and signs, and thinking about the space between signifier and signified is useful when we are dealing with politicians who want to convince us of anything. But any political utility The Idiot might carry is not the only thing that makes it valuable. It is not the only thing that makes it art. The Idiot is art because it is a framework for thinking about what Batuman refers to as “Life Itself.” It is art because it takes what seems invisible or disposable and renders it visible and transcendent. Any cultural criticism I write, like most other cultural criticism on the internet, is governed by a system of clicks and incentives. And the criticism that most people are most drawn to — perhaps especially Vox readers — is frequently criticism of a piece of art that deals explicitly with Donald Trump or Brett Kavanaugh or American politics, followed closely by criticism of a piece of art that is not about Trump but can be read through that lens. This is natural. The world feels as though it is in existential danger, and to engage with anything less than that danger feels trivial. So people enjoy feeling that the art they engage with is in some way helping to save the world. But political satire is not the only way that art can help us reckon with the world. And to insist that all art must be satirically attempting to subvert the state to be worth our time, or else failing to properly subvert the state and hence in need of chastisement, is impoverishing. In that 2006 n+1 essay, Batuman describes America’s literary landscape as one animated by guilt. She calls guilt “the single greatest obstacle to American literature today.” “Guilt leads to the idea that all writing is self-indulgence,” she writes. “Writers, feeling guilty for not doing real work, that mysterious activity—where is it? On Wall Street, at Sloane-Kettering, in Sudan?—turn in shame to the notion of writing as ‘craft.’ (If art is aristocratic, decadent, egotistical, self-indulgent, then craft is useful, humble, ascetic, anorexic—a form of whittling.)” Since Batuman wrote that essay 14 years ago, guilt has if anything become more central, not just to American writing but across the English-language literary landscape. Sally Rooney’s whole oeuvre is devoted so intensely to this sense of aesthetic guilt that she seems to have looped back around and made the guilt the subject of her art. Zadie Smith’s last essay collection features a frigidly nihilistic essay describing writing as “something to do,” in which Smith says that, in quarantine, she has found that building her life around writing has left her with only “a dry, sad, small idea of a life.” Smith cannot make writing mean something to her in the midst of a pandemic and a police riot. She cannot make art matter when concrete political action is so blindingly necessary. “The people sometimes demand change,” Smith writes. “They almost never demand art.” Smith is correct, as she almost always is: People are demanding change, and they are not going to demand art. That is good and necessary. But I want to suggest that even still, even now, in the midst of plague and panic, art can be good and necessary, too. Art is valuable as a thing in and of itself. It is separate from the influences of the state, and sometimes it is separate even from the demands of capital. It is where all the things that make the world unbearable are rendered into a space where we can at last, finally and for once, survive them. It is not indulgent or escapist to engage with art on levels outside of the political, or to free art from the shackles of the state. That is how we insist that life matters, regardless of what little value the state is telling us that our lives hold. Do not apologize for caring about art. Do not apologize for engaging with art outside of the terms set by the state, even now, even now. Insist on the value of art. Insist on the value of your life. The Vox Book Club is linking to Bookshop.org to support local and independent booksellers. Help keep Vox free for all Millions turn to Vox each month to understand what’s happening in the news, from the coronavirus crisis to a racial reckoning to what is, quite possibly, the most consequential presidential election of our lifetimes. Our mission has never been more vital than it is in this moment: to empower you through understanding. But our distinctive brand of explanatory journalism takes resources. Even when the economy and the news advertising market recovers, your support will be a critical part of sustaining our resource-intensive work. If you have already contributed, thank you. If you haven’t, please consider helping everyone make sense of an increasingly chaotic world: Contribute today from as little as $3.
Despite her virtue-signaling, Bowser is not progressive when it comes to policing
The mayor has done little to actually pursue meaningful police reforms.
A 2020 GOP thrashing could set up a Virginia Republican rebound in 2021
How a Republican former speaker could benefit from a Joe Biden victory in November.
Machine Gun Kelly and Megan Fox have a date night and more star snaps
Machine Gun Kelly and Megan Fox get snapped while out to dinner, Bella Hadid chows down on fried food and more...
What we should learn from the failed white-elephant project in Baltimore
How is it that the city turned $305 million into $170 million just a few years later?
Buffalo Police Department will no longer require names on uniforms
As a means to protect officers from threat incidents, Buffalo cops will don an identifying number instead of their name as part of a new policy change that went into effect last week.
Parents are more concerned about their children’s online safety during remote learning
Three-quarters of American parents are more worried than ever about their child’s online safety — due to distance learning, according to new research. As children return to their classrooms virtually, the survey asked 2,000 American parents of school-aged children about the learning curves they’re experiencing alongside their children this school year and the worries that...
Mexican teen in US illegally is charged as adult for attempted murder of Arizona trooper
A 17-year-old accused of shooting at a Department of Public Safety trooper in Phoenix last week is an "unlawfully present citizen of Mexico," and has been charged with attempted first-degree murder of a peace officer, officials said. 
Woman Sues Disney Claiming Son with Autism Refused Entry to Store for Not Wearing Mask
The claimant said her child, who is unable to wear a mask because he has autism, was distraught over the incident.
Mark Zuckerberg calls Breonna Taylor decision ‘painful reminder’ of injustice
Facebook chief Mark Zuckerberg reportedly called a grand jury’s failure to indict any cops for killing Breonna Taylor a “painful reminder” of the need for criminal justice reform. The billionaire CEO condemned the ruling that sparked protests around the country this week even as Facebook restricted how its employees can express support for the Black...
The best single-serve coffee makers of 2020
CNN Underscored tested 10 single-serve coffee makers, from companies like Nespresso, Keurig, and more, to find the best of the best. Here are our top three picks.
Child With Autism Removed From School After Staff Presume Coughing Tic Is Coronavirus Symptom
The boy was reported to have been evaluated by nurses and placed in a containment room before his mother arrived at the school.
Pence, Ivanka Trump visit Minneapolis salon destroyed in riots as state calls in National Guard
Vice President Mike Pence and presidential adviser Ivanka Trump visited a Black-owned Minneapolis salon destroyed by rioters in May during their Thursday trip to Minnesota.
Dodgers' Mookie Betts has the MLB's top-selling jersey for the 2020 season
Mookie Betts is the first Dodgers player to lead the league in jersey sales since the year-end rankings started in 2010.
Wildfires force some growers to test their grapes for contamination, while others sit 2020 out
West Coast winemakers have yet another hurdle to overcome this year.
Get cozy with a $15 California cab that begs for roasted chicken
RECOMMENDED | Also, a California rosé, an Australian riesling and two delicious kosher wines to round out the week.
'Long Live The King:' Stunning mural honoring Chadwick Boseman unveiled at Downtown Disney
A mural dedicated to Chadwick Boseman was unveiled at Downtown Disney in Anaheim, California Thursday.        
Robert De Niro calls Ruth Bader Ginsburg a 'great American,' labels Trump a 'criminal'
Robert De Niro is fearing for America's future now with the death of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Trump has lost patience with CDC head after series of mixed messages
Charles Barkley was 'pissed' at Kenny Smith for walking off set as NBA players protested Jacob Blake shooting
Former NBA guard Kenny Smith walked off the “NBA on TNT” set in August in solidarity with players who refused to play in their playoff game over the Jacob Blake shooting in Wisconsin.
Jets’ injury mess is as bad as they feared
The signs weren’t encouraging all week, but Jets coach Adam Gase confirmed that wide receivers Jamison Crowder and Breshad Perriman, as well as right tackle George Fant will not play in Sunday’s game in Indianapolis. “Yeah, they’re not going to be able to go,” Gase said when asked about the two wideouts before practice Friday....
Paris Police Suspect Terrorism In Attack Near Former 'Charlie Hebdo' Offices
An arrest has been made in the incident outside the building where a dozen people were gunned down in 2015 in apparent retaliation for the publication of cartoons that satirized the Prophet Muhammad.
Pompeo: Chinese Consulate in New York Engaged in Espionage
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo told the New York Post on Thursday that the recent arrest of a New York City police officer on charges of spying for the Chinese government was just the tip of the iceberg, with more arrests likely on the way.
Giant rat earns animal hero award for sniffing out landmines in Cambodia
An African giant pouched rat has been honored for his work detecting landmines in southeast Asia with a gold medal from an international veterinary charity.
Hours after a judge describes Tucker Carlson as ‘engaging in exaggeration,’ Trump highlights his false claims
The pool of "reasonable viewers" who treat Tucker Carlson with skepticism does not include the president.
Birds sang a 'sexier' tune during San Francisco's coronavirus lockdown, study finds
The birdsongs, as a result, began singing more quietly, hitting lower notes and improving their vocal performance. It sounds "sexier" to mates," too.        
Israel Adesanya vs. Paulo Costa may not prove historical, but certainly should not be missed | Opinion
Israel Adesanya vs. Paulo Costa has clear historical significance, but ahead of UFC 253, should it be positioned as one of the best ever?        Related StoriesUFC 253 video: Watch champ Israel Adesanya, challenger Paulo Costa make weightUFC 253 video: Israel Adesanya, Paulo Costa have to be separatedVideo: Dan Hardy breaks down Israel Adesanya vs. Paulo Costa at UFC 253 
The future of the vote
Tara Jacoby for Vox Tech and our democracy are more connected than ever before. The 2020 presidential election was always going to be a pivotal moment for our country. Then the Covid-19 pandemic’s human and economic tolls raised the stakes. The pandemic also accelerated a shift that was already happening: It made technology an even bigger factor in the future of our democracy. Some of this won’t surprise you. In 2016, as then-presidential contender Donald Trump amassed attention and supporters on his way to the White House, Americans on both sides of the political aisle started grasping in real time how powerful a tool the internet is for politicians and their supporters. We also realized that nefarious actors, many of them linked to foreign governments, were exploiting major online platforms like Facebook and Twitter to spread misinformation, exacerbate political tensions, and interfere with the United States’ electoral process. In the four years since, tech companies and their leaders have pledged to be better prepared in 2020, and to prevent their platforms and tools from being used to mess with our democracy. But that’s a daunting task. Tech companies are still lagging behind in an ever-evolving situation, and election misinformation keeps spreading. On top of all that, the pandemic has created a host of unforeseen challenges as in-person campaigning has shifted almost entirely online and as more Americans than ever before are expected to vote by mail. Open Sourced’s Future of the Vote project explores the consequences of our political world’s inextricable links to the tech world and explains what you should watch out for online ahead of November 3. —Samantha Oltman, Recode editor
Amy Coney Barrett's People of Praise and the Role of Women, According to Former Members
People who once belonged to the self-described charismatic Christian community told Newsweek women are expected to be "absolutely obedient" to their husbands as well as male leaders.
Christina El Moussa deletes wedding photos after split from Ant Anstead
Anstead still has a photo of their wedding day posted to his own Instagram page.
'The Comey Rule' shows off a sensational cast in a slightly uneven miniseries
"The Comey Rule" employs a clunky framing device, turning Rod Rosenstein into the awkward narrator of the story. Brilliant casting from top to bottom, however, elevates this two-part Showtime adaptation of former FBI director James Comey's book, which adopts a sympathetic stance toward the no-win scenario the bureau faced with its twin investigations into presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.
Ahead of Election, Unemployment Is Falling Faster in Sharpest Obama-Trump Swing Counties
The unemployment rate in some of the counties that swung most from Obama to Trump is better than the U.S. average.
Disclosure Doesn’t Work on a Shameless President
Again and again, President Donald Trump has violated, evaded, or ignored the law. The Constitution says a president cannot accept payments from foreign governments, but Trump did. The Constitution says that the principal officers of executive departments—members of the Cabinet—must be confirmed by the Senate. Trump junked that rule too, relying instead on his power to appoint temporary acting officials. A century and a half of legal precedents establish that a president must generally comply with subpoenas from Congress, even if he does not like the questions. Again, Trump disregarded seemingly established law.Courts have sometimes checked the Trump presidency, but not always. But court decisions take years to decide and longer to enforce. In July, the Supreme Court ruled that Congress and New York State prosecutors could legally subpoena Trump’s accountants and bankers for his financial records—a ruling that was followed by yet more Trump litigation seeking to challenge, or at least delay, the subpoenas. Even impeachment did not restrain Trump. His strong grip on his party—and on a sufficient minority of the American public—protected him from the Constitution’s ultimate remedy.The Trump presidency has exposed the degree to which presidential compliance with law is voluntary. The American system relies heavily on the president’s own sense of honor and integrity, on the president’s own wish to do what is right. The Trump presidency demonstrated how inadequate are custom and tradition to restrain a president determined to do wrong.Half a century ago, Congress and many states enacted ambitious reforms in response to Watergate and other abuses of government power. The dominant theme of those 1970s reforms was disclosure. Politicians would disclose more of their personal finances. Parties and campaigns would disclose more of their donations. Executive-branch agencies would disclose more to Congress. Congress would open more of its committee meetings to public view, and the sessions of the House and Senate to television cameras.“Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants,” Louis Brandeis wrote in 1913, and the reformers of the 1970s adopted that motto as their own.Over the past half century, some of those disclosure mechanisms have deteriorated. The fog of dark money has considerably obscured election finance, for example.But sunlight disinfects only when the general public and elite stakeholders care about what is disclosed. In the Trump years, that assumption of the reformist creed of the 1970s has repeatedly proved false. Scandal after scandal has come to light, without Trump suffering political consequences severe enough to deter or correct corrupt behaviorTrump has done his best to defeat disclosure, notably by refusing to release his tax returns. Still, the main elements of Trump’s behavior in office have become visible. There is no exact count of the public money that has flowed into Trump businesses, but at a minimum it exceeds $1.1 million. There is no count at all of the money Trump has collected from foreign governments, but it has been disclosed that representatives of 22 foreign nations have stayed at his properties. It became a public scandal that he tried to score a massive international payday for himself by holding the 2020 G7 summit at a golf resort he owns in Florida. There has been some disclosure of the flow of Republican Party funds to Trump businesses: at least $17 million since 2016. It’s murkier how much Trump pocketed from his 2017 inauguration committee, but court documents suggest that the figure might be substantial.Likewise, the defiance of congressional subpoenas happened in plain sight. Trump brought that fight to the Supreme Court and lost—but bought himself enough time to postpone any response until after the 2020 election. Many of the worst outrages of the Trump years were blurted by the president himself on live television: Yes, he fired FBI Director James Comey in order to thwart an investigation of Trump’s Russia connections; yes, he asked China and Ukraine to deliver dirt on his most likely presidential election opponent; yes, he wants to cram through a last-minute Supreme Court appointment to help him in the legal battles he expects after the 2020 vote. Americans saw and heard all this. Many cared. But not all. And not enough.Post-Watergate America was a country characterized by a strong center and weak partisanship. During the Watergate scandal, a president elected by almost 60 percent of the vote lost office when proof of his personal involvement in criminal activity turned the leaders of his own party against him. That’s a vanished world. The America of the 2020s is more polarized and partisan than at any time since the aftermath of the Civil War. Trump was elected by 46 percent of the vote, and nothing—good or bad—has much moved the dial ever since. In 2017, 2018, and the first half of 2019, Trump presided over the best economy since the late 1990s. His average approval rating never reached even 50 percent. In 2020, Trump presided over the worst sequence of disasters since the early 1930s. His poll numbers never dipped below 40 percent. When he was caught dead to rights in the Ukraine scandal, his party stayed loyal to him, with the exception of only a single senator. When he brazenly violated the law and delivered his nomination acceptance speech from the South Lawn of the White House, his party leadership all joined him there. When he was recorded admitting that he had knowingly underplayed the worst pandemic in a century, there was hardly a murmur of reproach from his own side.Disclosure assumes a political system that cares about the things disclosed. And that is not the political system the United States has in 2020.That insight is the basis for a new sequence of political reforms proposed by House Democrats September 23, the Protecting Our Democracy Act of 2020. The bill proposes more than a dozen measures to address specific abuses of the Trump years. And for the most part, disclosure alone is not considered a sufficient remedy.The first measure would restrict the presidential pardon power. It would prohibit self-pardon by the president, clarify that it is indeed illegal for a president to sell pardons, and require release to Congress of information about any pardon from which the president or his family might personally benefit.The second measure would stop the clock on statutes of limitations for any federal crime committed by the president or vice president. Because current rules forbid prosecuting the president for federal crimes, it’s unfair that he can use his period in office to outrun federal crimes he might have committed before or during his tenure.The third measure would codify the emoluments clause of the U.S. Constitution into statute. Trump brazenly and nakedly violated the clause. But the clause is not self-executing. The Constitution insists that the president should not accept payments from foreign governments. It offers no guidance as to what should happen if a president goes ahead and does it anyway. The third measure also restricts the president’s ability to pocket money from domestic interests, such as a party committee or party candidates.The fourth puts teeth into congressional subpoena powers. As things stand, it’s up to the executive branch to enforce subpoenas—which has proved quite a problem when it is the executive branch that decides to ignore them. The new proposal would allow Congress to bypass the executive and ask courts to impose fines on defiant officeholders.The fifth would reduce the president’s scope to redirect money that Congress voted to spend on one purpose and to instead spend it on a different purpose.The sixth would curtail the vast agglomeration of emergency powers horrifyingly detailed in The Atlantic back in 2019.The seventh—this one does rest on disclosure—would require the attorney general to keep a log of his or her contacts with the White House and provide that log to the Department of Justice’s inspector general twice a year.The eighth would clarify that inspectors general may be removed only for cause. It would require the president to provide documentation of that cause to Congress before the removal went into effect.The ninth would protect whistleblowers and clarify that it is indeed legal for whistleblowers to provide information directly to the relevant committee of Congress.The 10th would limit the maximum tenure of acting Cabinet officials to 120 days.The 11th would eliminate the courtesy that leaves enforcement of the Hatch Act to the president when White House personnel are involved. Trump abused this courtesy to free his staff to do political work at taxpayer expense. This measure also raises the maximum fine under the Hatch Act to $50,000 and expedites collection of those fines.The 12th and 13th measures impose new requirements on campaigns, candidates, and their families to report foreign contacts—and clarifies that it is, yes, illegal for a U.S. campaign to accept dirt on political adversaries from foreign persons and governments.You probably imagined that many of these proposals were law already. Arguably, many of them were. But a lot of existing anti-corruption law was informative or indicative, rather than punitive.In a lecture delivered in 1897, the future Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. said that to truly understand the law, “you must look at it as a bad man, who cares only for the material consequences which such knowledge enables him to predict, not as a good one, who finds his reasons for conduct, whether inside the law or outside of it, in the vaguer sanctions of conscience.”Until now, however, the law around the presidency did not work that way. “Thou shalt not take foreign emoluments” may impress the honest and patriotic president. But what if the president is not honest or patriotic? What happens if that president accepts a foreign emolument? The answer turned out to be: nothing much. As a result, a dishonest and unpatriotic president grabbed with both hands, and corrupted one of the two great political parties to acquiesce.The House Democrats’ reform bill obviously will not be enacted as long as Donald Trump can wield a veto. But if Trump is ejected in this year’s election and the Senate Republicans who protected him lose their majority, the reform bill—or much of it—may become law.I’ve gone into some detail about the House Democrats’ bill to underscore how moderate it is, how respectful it is of the important prerogatives of a legitimate presidency. The bill does not, to cite just one example, forbid the president to talk to the attorney general about particular cases (although in almost every case, the president should refrain from doing that). It does not require the attorney general to inform Congress about such conversations. That would compromise the cohesion of the executive branch. It requires only that a record be kept, that it be shared at intervals with the Department of Justice’s own preexisting watchdog, the inspector general—and that it be available for later inspection by Congress if needed.The bill does not, to cite another example, empower Congress to enforce its own subpoenas by inherent authority, as 19th-century Congresses sometimes did. That could easily lead to abuses of individual rights. Congressional subpoenas will be enforced in court, and the penalties for defying subpoenas imposed only by courts.The bill does not, to take a third example, blur the status of inspectors general as executive-branch employees. It changes their status to make them more like civil servants, less like political appointees—but still chosen by, and answerable to, the executive, not Congress.Much of the bill deals with things that most of us had supposed were already rules: the president should not sell pardons, for example, or use them as part of a cover-up scheme. But it turned out that rules against corrupt pardoning had been voluntarily adopted by past presidents. If a president did not want to comply, the rule could not readily be enforced against him.In a way, you could read the bill as the Yes, Donald Trump Was a Criminal Act of 2021.And that suggests two of the bill’s maybe inevitable but still poignant unintended consequences.First, most of the Protecting Our Democracy Act is mind-crushingly morally obvious: Don’t accept clandestine political information from foreign governments. Don’t use the White House for your convention speech. The act of writing such basics into law in 2021 would lend some credibility to the future arguments of Trump’s enablers: Yes, much of what President Trump did was distasteful, but it was not strictly illegal. That’s why the country had to write new laws in 2021. I was as appalled as anybody else, but there was nothing to do—the president was acting within his rights as those rights existed at the time.That argument is mostly false. Donald Trump did violate existing law. It was not in fact legal for him to use his official powers to extort foreign governments to fabricate political dirt on his political opponents—that was already prohibited by many laws. The problem was that the enforcement of those laws depended on mechanisms that had rusted out. It will be important to underscore that point in the future. What went wrong in the Trump era was not that the president delicately tiptoed around the law. What went wrong in the Trump era was that the cops in charge of the law were asleep, or senile, or in cahoots with the president.Second, the Protecting Our Democracy Act amounts to a confession that the impeachment power is a dead letter. The House imposed the severest sanction a Congress can impose against an errant president. At trial, however, the president’s co-partisans protected him from removal—and after the trial, the president resumed his lawbreaking.There have now been four serious presidential impeachment processes in U.S. history: Andrew Johnson, Richard Nixon, Bill Clinton, and Donald Trump. In retrospect, it’s clear that the important variable in the outcome was the state of party politics at the time of the impeachment.The Nixon-Trump contrast is starkest. If Congress worked in the 2020s as it had in the 1970s, important Republicans would have broken ranks with Trump, and forced his resignation. If Congress worked in the 1970s as it does in the 2020s, Nixon would have served out his term. We have fully arrived at the predicament that Laurence Tribe and Joshua Matz warned of in their book on the impeachment process: When impeachment is most needed, it is least likely to be effective; when it is most likely to be effective, it is least needed.And so, the House Democrats are making do with a fallback remedy, a second-best or third-best.These reforms are all welcome and necessary. It’s a sad reflection on the state of U.S. politics that they are needed at all. The Founders imagined that Congress could set aside political partialities to act as a court of law upon an unfit president. That hope has proved one of their less workable ideas. Americans need to accept some sad realities about the state of their law and politics. That means new legislation that works around the defects of the impeachment remedy—and takes into account the grim fact of 21st-century hyper-partisanship.
US, UK reportedly set to announce new AI partnership
The Trump administration is set to announce that the United States and the United Kingdom have signed a new agreement to cooperate on research and development on artificial intelligence, Axios reported on Friday.
2 charged over virus outbreak at veterans home where 76 died
Since March, 76 veterans who contracted COVID-19 at Holyoke Soldiers' Home have died.
Channing Tatum and his abs return to work
Channing Tatum’s abs are back in business.
Trump's Supreme Court pick could turn back the clock on civil rights
Vanita Gupta writes that President Trump's next Supreme Court nominee could roll back progress on critical civil rights issues -- from LGBTQ rights to disability rights -- and blunt the positive change so many Americans seek.
UFC 253 video: Dominick Reyes, Jan Blachowicz intense at final faceoff
Dominick Reyes and Jan Blachowicz look ready to decide a new light heavyweight champion at UFC 253.        Related StoriesUFC 253 video: Dominick Reyes, Jan Blachowicz on mark for vacant 205 title fightUFC 253 video: Israel Adesanya, Paulo Costa have to be separatedUFC 253 faceoffs live video stream (11 a.m. ET) 
Carole Baskin's Next 'Dancing With the Stars' Song Is 'The Circle of Life' But It Has a Morbid Message
Here's why the "Tiger King" star may cry while dancing.
Trapped inside the Star Motel
Even before the pandemic, Orlando was plagued by a lack of affordable housing. Then Florida’s tourism economy crashed, leaving hundreds of people trapped in rundown motels on the edge of society.
As SEC football season opens, expect shows of unity but no anthem protests on field
SEC football teams won't likely be on the field, as usual, during the national anthem in 2020, but expect players to make shows of unity.       
Breonna Taylor's family demands release of grand jury transcripts
Breonna Taylor's family peaks out after a Kentucky grand jury indicted one officer for allegedly endangering Taylor's neighbors.
Trump Lower than Obama, Xi and Putin in Poll Revealing World's Most Admired Men
Obama deposed Bill Gates from the top slot in the YouGov poll of more than 45,000 people across 42 countries and territories.
Nintendo ramping up Switch production after months of shortages
The Nintendo Switch console has been among the hottest tech products this year. But months into the pandemic, the Switch is still proving had to find.       
Peter Navarro: 'Joe Biden Should Have Known Better' than to Slash Pensions for 20K Delphi Workers
White House trade adviser Peter Navarro says Democrat presidential candidate Joe Biden "should have known better" than to sit by and watch pensions get slashed for about 20,000 Delphi workers.