>>4527463

That was really interesting.

Especially such detals as the chain of 5 posts - that matches the framework of Qs information, suggesting that you're poking the ASF-related shill system. (Not convinced ASF = Apache Software Foundation, acroyms being so common out there)

If you're interested in more experiments, what happens if you troll these shills (especially on a 2nd reply so they're already on the hook) with terms that might make a human in the target environment respond … differently somehow? Like toss in a criticism of Apache, or talk about Apache having some connection to Israel, or Apache opposing Israel … anything to tickle the system and try to learn about who is on the other side. As they might respond differently from an established pattern if you score a hit.

Great, now I'm suggesting replying to shills. Faceplam.

>>4528731

>>4528759

I don't think the shutdown can affect Congress in a way that prevents the start of the new session. Or more generally, being able to pass bills. Consider, a shutdown is due to the lack of an appropriations bill in effect to establish the funding of the federal government. Such a bill comes from Congress. If Congress were shut down, then it would be impossible to ever escape a shutdown condition. It would be permanent, with no way out.

The start date of the new Congress is established in the 20th Amendment to the Constitution. It will be Jan 3, shutdown or no shutdown.

>>4528837

Yes, although the new Congress could then appropriate money (or do any of the other things that a Congress can do.)

>>4528869

Seems too quick. Public discussion of making new money would imply public awareness and coming to terms with the situation, unlikely to get there in a few days.

Original question was whether the shutdown could delay the MAGA Senate until after Jan 3. Answer to that is no, MAGA inbound and on schedule.