Nancy Pelosi has released a letter detailing House Democrats' response to this week's storming of the Capitol by Trump supporters. Democrats will advance a resolution calling on Vice President Pence to invoke the 25th amendment, declaring President Trump incapable of executing the duties of his office and making Vice President Pence the acting President. Following this resolution pertaining to the 25th amendment, Democrats will move to impeach President Trump in the House.

• What are likely to be the specific articles of impeachment advanced against Trump?

• Will the House Democratic caucus vote unanimously to impeach? What Republicans might also support the articles of impeachment?

• What is a plausible timeline for impeachment to move from the House to the Senate?

• Will the initiation of a new impeachment process divide Republicans over whether to impeach? Or will the new movement unite Republicans in opposition to impeachment?

• Some Republicans opposing impeachment have argued that the current moment calls for unity and healing, rather than impeachment. How will impeachment by Democrats affect interparty relations heading into the Biden administration?

Edit: this goes for really any drug. Tell your doctor. They won't dob you in, they just need to know to help you best.

Trump has done many things with his Twitter account. From firing employees, to attacking other politicians. Many call it one of the downfalls of the Trump presidency and the trump administration, his comments being harmful to others, but also by being harmful to the rhetoric and attracting new supporters.

His tweets are seen in a variety of different ways. some people, usually his supporters, like what he tweets; they see it as him speaking his mind and telling it as he sees it, sometimes strengthening their support for him. Other people, usually people who don’t like him, see his tweets as rude and possibly offensive, and dissuades them from supporting him even more.

How do you think his account being gone will affect the political landscape? Do you think it will affect his rhetoric at all? His support? Or will it not have any affect at all, after the events of Wednesday? Also, how do you think it will affect other politicians?

I'm looking at you, 1% move speed at 20% quality Anger!

As a uni history student, I absolutely adore history, and love it with a passion. However, many people, when I’m talking to them about it, claim to ‘hate history’ because it’s ‘boring and has no relevance’.

However, different ways of teaching it make it much more interesting - take Horrible Histories (UK TV Series, specifically series 1-5, as well as the books), which is a fantastic series, and makes history interesting, especially some of the songs. Also, films (such as 1917, Hitler Rise of Evi, The Iron Lady) can also make history fun

As for not being relevant, the opposite is most definitely true - especially this year, with how the virus has been dealt with, politicians could benefit from watching some horrible histories

Say a person from a couple thousand years ago was resurrected. We know that people were shorter a few thousand years ago, or would their height increase, judging by the fact that basically all guardians, excluding shaxx, are the same height. This is probably done for gameplay purposes though. For instance, take Jesus. He fits all of the criteria for becoming a guardian as stated by the speaker. If he was to get resurrected, would he remain the same height he was when he lived, or would that be altered. This also might have sometime to do with the fact that human and awoken guardians always have incredibly smooth and pristine skin, as they are basically gods.

A parking ticket average is 40$. If we base it on your 90k median household net worth then for Jeff Bezos a parking ticket would cost him over 80 million dollars.

I know that a republican civil war is looming, the Trumpists against the establishment types. But will the vote be so split that no 'Mitt Romney' type republican will want to vote for Trump? Will he still win? Will he be so disgraced even his diehard base will think he's old news and look at someone like Cruz or Hawley? How will it pan out, because in 2016, it really was the same situation were dealing with now. Everyone thought he was a joke candidate and had never be successful. But he trounced everyone and won the primary, and then the election. Could he still have that same underdog aspect going for him, or is he fundamentally old news?

The only reason I say it works in almost every case is because I know there's somebody in the comments who can think of an exception, but honestly this tip has never failed me. I actually saw this tip here a while back, but it's just so handy and I think everyone should know it.

I'm not religious, in fact I'm very anti-religious and enjoy discussing the effect religion has had, not just on LGBTQ people but also on women.

Every time or nearly every time I do this I get progressive religious people who will respond. In itself it's fine but then when I respond critically they'll shut down or I'll just get downvotes. Another problem I have is sometimes I'll see people want to rant something out or get something off their chest about religion, request they don't get responses from religious people assuring them that they're 'not all like that' or proselytising liberal Christianity and still get those responses.

Is there some sub for anti-religious LGBTQ people to discuss our issues without religious people intruding? They have spaces I'd expect to be banned for if I commented and I'm not interested in going there anyway, especially if they're looking for support and don't want anti-religious opinions. I'd like one for us too.

I really don't want responses defending liberal religion here. I don't want to debate you here, please be respectful of that.

This has never been done yet, porn addiction has been done but this hasn’t really been touched on and I’m really excited about prepping for this. Thanks for the motivation guys, I’ll be sure to mention this community.

Last August, I started my first year of college. I go to a very small school (no more than 15 people sharing my major that are in my year). I’ve always had trouble fitting in with kids my age, so when I encountered the crass and vulgar sense of humor of my classmates, I figured my general distaste for it was simply the result of different interests. Flash forward four months to the end of the semester and a particular classmate has invaded my personal space, initiated inappropriate and unsolicited contact, and petitioned me for sexual acts. It’s a textbook harassment case and I’m well within my rights to report this person.

I spoke to someone in the campus Title IX office, and they’ve asked to view group chat conversations in which the harassment has taken place, and it’s become clear to me that reporting this person might result in not only their expulsion, but expulsion/suspension and/or other disciplinary action taken against more of my classmates because I’ve shared the conversations with the Tite IX woman.

When I told some friends who had previously supported me filing a case against my harasser, they changed their tune and said it was incredibly unfair of me to potentially strip others of scholarships and/or their spaces in the work study program let alone their positions at our college because my harasser took things too far in my book. Even though only one of my classmates is my primary harasser, none of my other classmates have stuck up for me when witnessing the harassment occurring (some laugh when I say I’m uncomfortable and ask my harasser to stop) and have even gone so far as to join in.

The harassment has made it really difficult (sometimes impossible) to work both in class and in communal workspaces outside of class time. At the same time, I can see why people think it’s unfair for me to potentially have my entire class punished because someone touched me inappropriately. AITA?

EDIT: I'm overwhelmed by the amount of support I've received. I really can't thank everyone enough. I've made the decision to hand over the unreacted transcripts, and because of this I'd like to provide some additional info.

Additional INFO: Some of this has already been said in response to a commenter. There are two reasons [for the initial inner turmoil with decided wether or not to hand over the uncensored screenshots] but one holds more weight than the other. 1) I’m handing over four months worth of texts at about 100 texts per day. I was asked to hand in

I’ve heard people always say that when a company does well on their earnings, they become a more valuable company so their stock price will go up.

What’s in it for me if I don’t directly get paid by them and I am solely hoping for other investors to buy stocks too? Aren’t I really just relying on other people to buy too? What if no one wants to buy it even if “they become more valuable of a company due to strong earnings?”

I know there are dividends involved but That is besides the point.

News outlets have reported that Biden intends to nominate Pete Buttigieg to be Transportation Secretary. Is he qualified? Is it too small or too large a role? Can he handle it? Will this improve his chances of becoming President in the future?

"Pop songs will get shorter on average by the end of this decade because of faltering attention spans and 'skipping culture' on streaming services, experts say.

Our attention spans have dropped from 12 seconds to eight since 2000 and our song skipping culture has emerged in response, meaning it’s more vital for artists to hook listeners in early, load choruses up front and keep the overall track swift.

At the end of the decade it’s predicted that the average song will be a maximum of 2 minutes, putting the old three-minute pop song cliché to rest.

On music streaming services like Spotify, artists don't get royalties from a song being played if the listener doesn't get beyond the first 30 seconds. By 2030, it will therefore be more important than ever for songs to quickly progress to the next track on an album before listeners get bored, the experts say."

Song BPMs (Beat per minute) will drastically increase.

Given that melodies will have to be squeezed into a 2 minute timeframe, track tempos will increase, most likely resulting in less slow, ambient pop. Ballads on the other hand will probably not be affected.

"The average tempo of 2020's top 20 best-selling songs is a pulse-quickening 122 beats per minute. That's the highest it's been since 2009." - BBC

BPMs of best-selling tracks have been steadily rising since 2017, from 105 to 122BPM.

Track length per BPM in a traditional pop structure of :

(Intro - Verse1 - Prechorus - Chorus - Verse2 - Prechorus -Chorus - Bridge - Chorus - Chorus)

• 80 BPM : 3:47
• 90 BPM: 3:20
• 100 BPM: 3:00
• 110 BP: 2:45
• 120 BPM : 2:30
• 130 BPM: 2:20
• 140 BPM: 2:10

This may spark a new trend of using sub-genres which are traditionally high-BPM in nature, such as drum n bass, metal, dubstep, and techno which tend to be 150-175+ BPM. A good recent example is 'Drum Go Dum' by K/DA which showcases using 175BPM in a pop song.

Changes in song structures

• Bridges will be less common or played directly after the first chorus.
• 2nd verses will no longer be in the same melody as the first.
• Choruses will start at the beginning of the track, rather than after the pre-chorus.
• Second verses will be cut in half and going onto the pre-chorus.
• Choruses may not be played for the 3rd time after a bridge, and will be replaced with a cliffhanger or short instrumental drop.
• Instrumental intros and breaks will be shorter or less common.

I feel like the legion masters are commonly ignored but could be great unexplored plot points, this is a question that I've wondered for a while now.

CBC Article:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/carbon-tax-hike-new-climate-plan-1.5837709

I am seeing a lot of discussion about this in other (political) subs, and even the Premier of Ontario talking about how this will destroy the middle class.

Although i take that with a grain of salt, and am actually a supporter of a carbon tax, i want to know what expected economic and financial impact it will have on Canadians. I assume most people think our costs of food, groceries etc. will go up due to the corporations passing the cost of the tax onto us essentially. However i think the opposite will happen and this will force them to use cleaner methods to run their business, so although the capital upfront may be more for them, it will be cheaper in the long-run.

Also as someone who is looking to buy a car that uses premium gas soon, and hopes to use this car for at least 10 years, this is a bit discouraging lol (so i guess its already having an effect!)

Any thoughts?

EDIT 1:42 pm ET: Lots of interesting discussion and perspective here that I didn't expect for my first "real" reddit post lol. I've seen comments elsewhere saying how this will fuck the Rural folks of Canada who rely on Gas for heating their home. Im not a homeowner, but how much of this fear is justified? I know there is currently a rebate that will increase by 2030, but will that rebate offset the price to heat a whole home? I think the complaint of the rural folks is that it costs too much money to perform the upgrades to electric heating and that it is less efficient than gas (so then cost of insulation upgrading is there too). Was wondering if these fears can be addressed too.

EDIT2 7:30pm ET: I tried to post this question in a personalfinance sub to maybe get the political opinions removed from it, but i guess that's impossible since its so tied to our government. I will say however that it is worth reading the diverse opinions presented and take into account what the side opposite your opinion says. A lot of comments i read are like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4HR94tifIkM&ab_channel=videogamemaniac83 , but i guess i am guilty of it too LOL

Exhibit A

If any men here are diagnosed with depression and are currently on medications, you may experience some degree of sexual dysfunction. This can be difficulty getting an erection, difficulty maintaining an erection, or even a loss of libido. Antidepressants especially if paired with antipsychotics can have this effect. Some men will experience this more drastically than others.

Now, why exactly am I posting this? Because I know what it feels like to go through depression. I am aware of the symptoms depressed people go through day-to-day. Just a reminder for people out there struggling, because we can never have too much reminders: you are strong for hanging on, and you are strong for getting the help you need. And if you haven’t sought help already, I highly advise you visit a health professional when you can.

Sexual dysfunction is an unfortunate side effect but it is better to deal with this than to experience mood that ranges from flat to severely crippling. Please don’t stop your meds in fear of experiencing these side effects if the drawbacks are feelings of worthlessness, suicidal ideations, and many more associated with depression.

This post is targeted for people with depression who developed depression due to factors other than sexual dysfunction. If your depression is due to sexual dysfunction or body dysmorphia in the first place, and you are taking antidepressants with these side effects, consult with your doctor if it is possible to shift to a different drug regimen.

I cannot cover everything about depression and sexual dysfunction here without turning this post into a full-length journal article. Feel free to message me about any concerns not covered here. And for my fellow med students or doctors on this sub, feel free to add to the discussion or point out errors in my post if there are any.

I’ll end my post with this, for people currently going through this mental health problem: you are strong. You are worthy. Your negative thoughts do not define you. You are stronger than you think. And although things may not seem well now, it will get better eventually. Trust the process of healing. Get help when you can; you are not alone in this.

For example, taking a steaming hot shower then jumping in an ice bath.