they're not available for this purpose, then there's no reason why the president is not exercise his autricu, you know, recess. >> and i just link chuck's question with peter's. nothing illustrates better to put it mildly the eclectic nature to a definition of a recess. let's see what happened. so they met in the same pro forma session guided by the same standing order on december 23rd, as they've done three days later. but the reason we know it was not recess, it was session because they passed something. and for all the dozens of other times when they meet and don't translate business, especially when you have standing orders, which, again, is nothing more than a starting point. i said three times, the reason you typically have -- unless it's a gentlemen's agreement. democratic senate or republican senate, by time you gavel in and by the time you gavel vel oout, person can do anything by unanimous consent by new quorum. you can repeal the entire u.s. code, vacancy exists and the president submitted the names. so these absolutely nothing structurally that's different about december 23rd ver