2ndDegreeOWO

This could be a quick process, if they had the votes for it, the support of House/Senate leadership, and they tried to.

There's nothing in the constitution or law that forces them to spend a long time on investigations, scheduling, and votes. If they really wanted to, they could have the House vote on it one day, the Senate vote on it the next day, and have the criminal out on the 3rd day.

Yes, it won't at all happen that fast. Mainly because they'll (correctly or not) figure that they need time to build and airtight, convincing case in order to get enough Republicans on board. But, really, everyone in Congress -- Republicans included -- already know that this administration broke many laws at many points. And they don't have to prove it like in court -- all it takes is a vote ... and votes can be done quickly when they're motivated to do so.

Back in ye olden days, looking at an engraving of the Virgin Mary might be the closest you could feasibly get to porn.

It would fit with the suspicious pattern of Republicans suddenly growing a spine as soon as they're no longer concerned about reelection anymore.

He and his connections can start building defenses for it.

(And destroying as much evidence as possible, of course.)

You don’t unwind 2+ years of malfeasance and corruption quickly.

You don't need to.

You just need one simple and solid charge that will stick for an impeachment. Impeach the fuckers, and then worry about unraveling the rat's nest of corruption after they're out of office. When it comes to criminal cases later, then is the time for going slowly and methodically and leaving no stone unturned. But for now, we need swift, decisive action based on the most important and obvious points.

so they don’t try to block them from being sworn in

They'll do that regardless.

But, fun fact, it doesn't matter if the new batch of congresscritters is sworn in or not -- the ones who were voted out stop being congressmen on January 3rd, whether they have a replacement sworn in or not. No matter if their replacements get sworn in or not, they have to go. (Although I'm unclear on the subject of successful incumbents. They certainly don't have to leave, since they won reelection ... but do they need to be sworn in again after every election, or do they just keep going on like before?)

But if they try to play too many games with the 'swearing in' nonesense, the incoming congressmen can play hardball right back. There's no constitutional requirement for being sworn in, not even a rule of Senate/House procedure. It's just traditional that new congressmen get sworn in before participating. But if they're playing games with not letting the new ones get sworn in, they could also just show up and start participating/voting anyway. Maybe swear themselves in first, and dare the rest to stop them. The current batch of Republicans have violated plenty of norms and traditions already, and if they try to use this norm/tradition as a stumbling block, then let's violate this one too.

Very interesting that they'd try to start this before the new Dems even take office. Rats and sinking ships indeed.

Or is this a roundabout way to protect Kegsbreath, by first starting an intentionally flawed impeachment proceeding in order to poison any later attempt?

And I have a hard time believing that there isn't some solid or liquid (or maybe some other exotic state of matter, due to the heat and pressure) inner core way down in there, even if it's relatively tiny compared to the size of the planet.

Even if it was entirely made of gas when it formed, surely some materials would have fallen in over the eons that could stay solid/liquid at the pressure/temperature of a gas giant's core?

Ah, but what if you brought a large balloon, inflated it, and flew a helicopter inside the balloon?

Sure. 25% --> 37% ... as long as you (for some arbitrary reason) only consider 8 "places" in the solar system.

7 of those are planets, but Titan is a moon. If we're going to include moons, then there's going to be a whole lot more than 8 "places" in the solar system, so the percentage of places where helicopters can work is going to be greatly reduced. If we get really pedantic and consider any orbiting body in the solar system to be a "place", then there will be hundreds, thousands of them where helicopters can't possibly work, once you start tallying up asteroids and comets.

Also, why does the list include 7 planets, not 8? What? Are you not interested in trying to make a helicopter work on Mercury? That's quitter talk!

Fucker obviously doesn't give a shit whether or not such a ship would suit the needs of the modern Navy, or whether it will suit the Navy's needs going forward into a decades-long service life. He just wants a really big boat to put his own name on.

That's just because ZFS's disc cache shows up as application-used memory, instead of disc cache memory. (Disc cache memory is often reported in system monitor tools as 'free' memory, because it can be freed up as soon as you need it. ZFS's disc cache works the same way, but it's not reported separately to the OS, so that makes it look like ZFS is using a shitload of RAM.) If it bothers you, you can set a maximum amount of RAM for ZFS to use, and that will clear it up. It will mean that your performance is slightly worse, though, because ZFS won't be able to use disc caching optimally.