USA Politics (redux)

[T. D.]

It's Trump long wished-for killing spree, these lame-duck executions.

He's probably barely able to eat his hamberders, he's so excited.

No excuse, but this pretty much reflects GOP thinking. "Conservatives" have long lusted for more executions. They're currently throwing in some token whiteys to make the bloodlust appear racially impartial.

[Mirror Image]

This just in: the House voted for impeachment! WOO HOO!!! YES!!!

And now we wait to see what the Senate does. Unfortunately, they're not in session and, from my understanding, won't be until after Biden's inauguration.

[Brahmsian]

Six Republicans (so far) have announced that they will vote to impeach.

Those six can at least look at themselves in the mirror.

I guess there were ten Republicans who voted for impeachment.

[drogulus]

Can't speak to the first point (obvious question: if true, why did McC bend over for Cheeto at every opportunity?).

     Mitch hates Trump for losing the Georgia races. For the most part, Mitch found it easier to hold his caucus together by siding with Trump consistently than opposing him, though he did on occasion. Still, Mitch hates Trump for his inability to do the job and the damage he's done to the party.

[T. D.]

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/12/mikie-sherrill-capitol-hill-attack-458655
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-capitol-riot-new-jersey-congresswoman-video-20210113-snvwbe3aj5aqdo6vjr4i6ohzdu-story.html

New Jersey congresswoman says fellow lawmakers led groups through U.S. Capitol as 'reconnaissance' for deadly siege

[BasilValentine]

     Mitch hates Trump for losing the Georgia races. For the most part, Mitch found it easier to hold his caucus together by siding with Trump consistently than opposing him, though he did on occasion. Still, Mitch hates Trump for his inability to do the job and the damage he's done to the party.

I would think many of the Republicans would want to put a stake through the fat ba$†ard's heart and keep him from ever running again. But alas, their cowardice and lust for power knows no bounds.

[drogulus]

     

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/12/mikie-sherrill-capitol-hill-attack-458655
https://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/us-elections-government/ny-capitol-riot-new-jersey-congresswoman-video-20210113-snvwbe3aj5aqdo6vjr4i6ohzdu-story.html

New Jersey congresswoman says fellow lawmakers led groups through U.S. Capitol as 'reconnaissance' for deadly siege

The lawmakers, some of who "have served in the military and are trained to recognize suspicious activity," noted that Capitol tours have been prohibited since March as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic and they said the tours were so unusual that they were reported to security on Jan. 5, ahead of the following day's violence.

"The visitors encountered by some of the Members of Congress on this letter appeared to be associated with the rally at the White House the following day," they wrote. "Members of the group that attacked the Capitol seemed to have an unusually detailed knowledge of the layout of the Capitol Complex. The presence of these groups within the Capitol Complex was indeed suspicious."

[Daverz]

This just in: the House voted for impeachment! WOO HOO!!! YES!!!

And now we wait to see what the Senate does. Unfortunately, they're not in session and, from my understanding, won't be until after Biden's inauguration.

Goddam WAPO, you buzzkills!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

[Mirror Image]

Goddam WAPO, you buzzkills!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

Damn, you know I had completely forgotten about this possibility. I wonder if there's a chance they'd reconvene just for this vote?

[T. D.]

Damn, you know I had completely forgotten about this possibility. I wonder if there's a chance they'd reconvene just for this vote?

I think the Senate would have to vote unanimously to reconvene early.
In other words, will never happen.
I'll look for the link I saw earlier.

Added: Not completely clear, though I say unlikely because McConnell would have to sign on.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-consider-impeachment-25th-amendment-measures-n1253693

According to a memo circulated by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., if the House impeaches Trump this week, the earliest the Senate could take up the articles would be Jan. 19, unless all 100 senators agree to come back early.

But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is exploring a possible workaround — using the authority granted to the two Senate leaders in 2004 to reconvene the Senate in times of emergency, a senior Democratic aide said. That would allow for a potential impeachment trial to begin immediately after articles of impeachment are sent.

[Mirror Image]

I think the Senate would have to vote unanimously to reconvene early.
In other words, will never happen.
I'll look for the link I saw earlier.

Added: Not completely clear, though I say unlikely because McConnell would have to sign on.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-democrats-consider-impeachment-25th-amendment-measures-n1253693

According to a memo circulated by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., if the House impeaches Trump this week, the earliest the Senate could take up the articles would be Jan. 19, unless all 100 senators agree to come back early.

But Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is exploring a possible workaround — using the authority granted to the two Senate leaders in 2004 to reconvene the Senate in times of emergency, a senior Democratic aide said. That would allow for a potential impeachment trial to begin immediately after articles of impeachment are sent.

Since the Vice President is the one who presides over the Senate, couldn't Pence order them all to come back and vote?

[T. D.]

Since the Vice President is the one who presides over the Senate, couldn't Pence order them all to come back and vote?

I have no idea. Not going to investigate, since I can't imagine Pence doing so. He already refused to go the 25th Amendment route.

Re. McConnell, here's an article that ventures into fantasy land:

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2021-01-13/will-mcconnell-do-to-trump-what-howe-did-to-thatcher

The possibility that Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell might choose in the end to eviscerate Donald Trump instantly put me in mind of an only slightly less dramatic event in British politics — when, in 1990, a man long perceived as a weak and cringing loyalist stood up in the House of Commons and calmly murdered Margaret Thatcher. 

[milk]

Since the Vice President is the one who presides over the Senate, couldn't Pence order them all to come back and vote?

I could be wrong but I think this is the prerogative of the leadership. For example, when Biden was VP, he couldn't order the majority-Republican Senate back. That's my GUESS.

[T. D.]

Interesting discussion of GOP power dynamics:

https://news.yahoo.com/impeachment-vote-reveals-gop-torn-over-how-to-deal-with-trump-224613925.html
...
And that is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to how grassroots purists and extremists now control much of American politics — in both parties to some extent, but in the Republican Party in particular. Many Republican members of Congress have been afraid to speak out against Trump or to vote for impeachment because they fear they and their families might be harmed, or even killed, by Trump supporters.

This terrible reality was reported by numerous press outlets, and the Republican member of Congress who spoke to Yahoo News last week expressed that same fear of bodily harm, or even death, for those who might oppose or seek to impose consequences on a lawless and lying president.

This congressman argued that a frontal assault would only make Trumpism stronger, because current GOP officeholders who vote for impeachment will lose their seats to more radical and far-right Republicans in party primaries. And due to a combination of political polarization and gerrymandering that has made so many congressional districts either safely Republican or Democratic, primaries are often the only races that members of Congress have to worry about.

"People don't seem to understand that the only election that matters is your primary," Brendan Buck, a onetime adviser to former House Speaker Paul Ryan, told Yahoo News.

That's a structural reality of American politics that is at the root of many problems. And it is a far bigger issue in the House, where members face reelection every two years.
...

[JBS]

Goddam WAPO, you buzzkills!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2021/01/12/once-trump-leaves-office-senate-cant-hold-an-impeachment-trial/

That argument is probably not true, but there's enough doubt on the point that GOP senators will be able to use it as a justification for not voting for conviction. I predict only a handful of GOP senators will vote to convict, and no conviction will result.  I have no reason to not believe that most of the GOP thinks it necessary to placate the Trumpniks no matter what.

[71 dB]

Trump, the president of zero popular vote wins and two impeachments. 

[BasilValentine]

In an interview conducted by Rachel Maddow, Representative Mikie Sherrill (D-NJ) claims that republican members of Congress and/or their staffs gave reconnaissance tours of the Capitol Building on January 5 to groups of insurrectionists who would attack it the next day. On January 5 the Capitol was officially closed to all tours due to Coivd restrictions and the only way a tour group could get access was in the company of a legislator or member of a legislator's staff. Sherrill intends to push for the exposure and expulsion of the members responsible for their part in this alleged abetting of insurrection. The segment begins at 28:50, the interview begins a few minutes later:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LhO6itfkLs0

[JBS]

That argument is probably not true, but there's enough doubt on the point that GOP senators will be able to use it as a justification for not voting for conviction. I predict only a handful of GOP senators will vote to convict, and no conviction will result.  I have no reason to not believe that most of the GOP thinks it necessary to placate the Trumpniks no matter what.

Lo and behold Tom Cotton already saying it
https://mobile.twitter.com/maggieNYT/status/1349546681281507329

[Daverz]

That argument is probably not true, but there's enough doubt on the point that GOP senators will be able to use it as a justification for not voting for conviction. I predict only a handful of GOP senators will vote to convict, and no conviction will result.  I have no reason to not believe that most of the GOP thinks it necessary to placate the Trumpniks no matter what.

Lawrence Tribe does not agree with Luttig (who wrote that WAPO opinion piece):

https://www.youtube.com/v/HckxryPw6fI&feature=emb_logo&ab_channel=MatthewChapman

""Well, basically, the Constitution's text makes it clear that as long as you are on officer when you commit an impeachable offense, the ability to convict you and prevent you from repeating your dangerous activities doesn't cease," said Tribe. "If it were written otherwise, it would be crazy. The Secretary of War in 1876 thought he could game the system by resigning his office minutes before the impeachment was returned. But then the Senate, by a vote of 37-29 held understandably, you can't get away with it that way. It's not like when someone says you're fired, so you can't fire me, I've already resigned."

"The fact is that the Constitution was designed so that the most dangerous characters couldn't escape the important remedy of being taken out of public office in the future simply by resigning. That won't work," continued Tribe. "And, although there are some scholars I really admire — in particular Judge Michael Luttig, who doesn't agree with me but says he thinks I've got a powerful argument — I think the case is pretty clear, and there is a lot of argument, both historical and textual, for the view I have about this."

[MusicTurner]

#45 "has instructed aides not to pay Giuliani's legal fees...and has demanded that he personally approve any reimbursements for the expenses Giuliani incurred while traveling on the president's behalf to challenge election results in key states."

"White House officials have started blocking Mr. Giuliani's calls to the president, another adviser said."

as per WAPO and NYT.