Is McConnell still planning on waiting until after inauguration to move forward?
answer seems to change every time i hear an answer
He announced today that he is waiting until after.
Well. According to Chanus' findings on the Disqualification vote, that means Majority Leader Schumer can disqualify Trump from holding office with a straight majority vote...
This is probably what McConnell is hoping for, letting the D's do the dirty work while still managing to rid the GOP of having to worry about him running again.
My entire adult life has been Democrats having to spend most of their time unfucking whatever the Republicans did while they were in power.
Congrats! You are under 70 years old!
Edit - the last person who couldn't make this claim voted for LBJ.
Is McConnell still planning on waiting until after inauguration to move forward?
answer seems to change every time i hear an answer
He announced today that he is waiting until after.
Well. According to Chanus' findings on the Disqualification vote, that means Majority Leader Schumer can disqualify Trump from holding office with a straight majority vote...
This is probably what McConnell is hoping for, letting the D's do the dirty work while still managing to rid the GOP of having to worry about him running again.
yeah McConnell is more than happy to let this happen on Schumer's watch
Yup, the more I think about it, the more I believe that Mcconnell's calculus is to dump this in the democratic senate's lap, trade/muck up favors to approve Biden's cabinet appointments, and if the impeachment is indeed successful, he can gleefully point to those DURN DURTY EBIL DEMOCRAATS for impeaching the true victor of the previous election or something.
Is McConnell still planning on waiting until after inauguration to move forward?
answer seems to change every time i hear an answer
He announced today that he is waiting until after.
Well. According to Chanus' findings on the Disqualification vote, that means Majority Leader Schumer can disqualify Trump from holding office with a straight majority vote...
This is probably what McConnell is hoping for, letting the D's do the dirty work while still managing to rid the GOP of having to worry about him running again.
yeah McConnell is more than happy to let this happen on Schumer's watch
Yup, the more I think about it, the more I believe that Mcconnell's calculus is to dump this in the democratic senate's lap, trade/muck up favors to approve Biden's cabinet appointments, and if the impeachment is indeed successful, he can gleefully point to those DURN DURTY EBIL DEMOCRAATS for impeaching the true victor of the previous election or something.
i don't think it goes that far. he doesn't believe the election fraud bullshit. he just doesn't want Republicans responsible for anything
Allegedly a voice of reason.
+11
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
edited January 2021
Its like that old cartoon where the turtle hides in shell as nuclear bomb goes off and pretends he'll survive. Shit's happening now, McConnell you fucker.
it is telling that nobody is sure how it works because the only time in the last almost 100 years impeachment was legitimate before Trump was Nixon and he resigned before it could happen
Clinton was not only bullshit but he also was in his second term so Disqualification would have been pointless
It is also more than a little worrying that the majority of the rules seem to come down to the whims of the Senate at the time. A lot of it is internal to the Senate, but barring from office could easily become a Supreme Court question. I don't particularly like the thought of this Supreme Court weighing in on it. If I get a time machine the second thing I am doing is beating the writers of the constitution until they fully write out what they mean about so god damned many things,
it is telling that nobody is sure how it works because the only time in the last almost 100 years impeachment was legitimate before Trump was Nixon and he resigned before it could happen
Clinton was not only bullshit but he also was in his second term so Disqualification would have been pointless
It is also more than a little worrying that the majority of the rules seem to come down to the whims of the Senate at the time. A lot of it is internal to the Senate, but barring from office could easily become a Supreme Court question. I don't particularly like the thought of this Supreme Court weighing in on it. If I get a time machine the second thing I am doing is beating the writers of the constitution until they fully write out what they mean about so god damned many things,
Disqualification is explicitly in the Constitution
I mean McConnel is only majority leader until georgia seats its senators, ain't nothing they need to trade with that old fool for. He doesn't want to do impeachment, fuck'em get it done after Biden is in.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
it is telling that nobody is sure how it works because the only time in the last almost 100 years impeachment was legitimate before Trump was Nixon and he resigned before it could happen
Clinton was not only bullshit but he also was in his second term so Disqualification would have been pointless
It is also more than a little worrying that the majority of the rules seem to come down to the whims of the Senate at the time. A lot of it is internal to the Senate, but barring from office could easily become a Supreme Court question. I don't particularly like the thought of this Supreme Court weighing in on it. If I get a time machine the second thing I am doing is beating the writers of the constitution until they fully write out what they mean about so god damned many things,
Disqualification is explicitly in the Constitution
there's no case to argue before a court
There would be a question of being able to disqualify without a conviction.
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
The only thing that would really be arguable is whether you can disqualify without a conviction.
It really seems like the smart republican move would be wait until schumer gets in, vote to convict with just enough republicans, then take the “oh so sad but what can you do really?” tack.
Trump hanging around in 2022 or running in 2024 would be poison for the Republican Party.
it is telling that nobody is sure how it works because the only time in the last almost 100 years impeachment was legitimate before Trump was Nixon and he resigned before it could happen
Clinton was not only bullshit but he also was in his second term so Disqualification would have been pointless
It is also more than a little worrying that the majority of the rules seem to come down to the whims of the Senate at the time. A lot of it is internal to the Senate, but barring from office could easily become a Supreme Court question. I don't particularly like the thought of this Supreme Court weighing in on it. If I get a time machine the second thing I am doing is beating the writers of the constitution until they fully write out what they mean about so god damned many things,
Disqualification is explicitly in the Constitution
there's no case to argue before a court
How many votes it takes is not was more my point. He could tantrum to the Supreme Court that it is a 2/3rds vote as there is nothing explicit one way or the other. Hopefully it will be a moot point, but I don't trust anyone in the current political climate. Also, the question monker poses.
0
Options
silence1186Character shields down!As a wingmanRegistered Userregular
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
Yeah especially without Trump brand hate viagara to keep them up and ready. Honestly with how muted his followers/supporters have been since being banned from twitter, it just makes twitter all the more complicit in the violence where they refused to remove him from their platform.
And once again shows Veep Harris was 100% correct when she said he should have been years ago.
I would like some money because these are artisanal nuggets of wisdom philistine.
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
it is telling that nobody is sure how it works because the only time in the last almost 100 years impeachment was legitimate before Trump was Nixon and he resigned before it could happen
Clinton was not only bullshit but he also was in his second term so Disqualification would have been pointless
It is also more than a little worrying that the majority of the rules seem to come down to the whims of the Senate at the time. A lot of it is internal to the Senate, but barring from office could easily become a Supreme Court question. I don't particularly like the thought of this Supreme Court weighing in on it. If I get a time machine the second thing I am doing is beating the writers of the constitution until they fully write out what they mean about so god damned many things,
Disqualification is explicitly in the Constitution
there's no case to argue before a court
There would be a question of being able to disqualify without a conviction.
That may not actually matter for 14th amendment disqualification. It just says you can't hold office if the person "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion". It makes no mention of conviction requirements, legal or impeachment-wise. Of course it also hasn't been used since WW1, but for that one, a House committee simply declared the Representative ineligible for office, twice, since he also won the special election to replace him.
SiliconStew on
Just remember that half the people you meet are below average intelligence.
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
Trump got 74 million votes. If say,1% of them are hardcore enough to actually want violence, that's still 740,000 people. Enough to put just under 15k people around every single state capitol.
There's no plan, there's no race to be run
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
Haha my terrible rep voted no by proxy so there is now video/audio of someone else informing the House that they voted ‘No’ on H. Res. 24.
That sound byte is gonna be my ringtone. I’m going to sneak it into the Christmas music at the nearby mall. I will do the Say Anything thing with a vintage boombox wired to play MP3s with it any time they make a public appearance (which I will have to go to DC to do because they never ever show their face out here where they might catch a case of plebianism from their actual constituents).
I might not be able to un-gerrymander my district enough, or un-MAGA-chud a good portion of it enough, to send them back to private life but I can help to, how does that go? Tie their name to this with a steel cord for all of history.
_
Your Ad Here! Reasonable Rates!
+12
Options
EncA Fool with CompassionPronouns: He, Him, HisRegistered Userregular
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
Trump got 74 million votes. If say,1% of them are hardcore enough to actually want violence, that's still 740,000 people. Enough to put just under 15k people around every single state capitol.
Before there was controversy or any resistance here, when they had all the energy of the GOP trying to get them there, they barely managed to get 20k of the 200k people at DC they wanted. 1% Is overestimating it.
Trying to figure out if McConnell is waiting to see how Trumpism declines after the Inauguration before deciding whether to whip for conviction, or is stupid enough to think not convicting is going to work out well in 2024...
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
Trump got 74 million votes. If say,1% of them are hardcore enough to actually want violence, that's still 740,000 people. Enough to put just under 15k people around every single state capitol.
True, but then we would have seen more at the Capitol Building and that was before consequences like firings and arrests started raining down.
Plus Trump just tossed them under the bus. Probably will still see some violence though.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
Nah, the presence of the troops will cause most people to decide to stay home even if they were considering coming out, and it's going to be a complete nothingburger.
And then we're going to have to listen to years of right-wing talking heads talking about how it was a giant overreaction.
Fuck the talking heads. Joe Biden can say he had a stronger military presence at his inauguration than Trump. I'm sure that'll burn the orange moron right into his soul.
Posts
Congrats! You are under 70 years old!
Edit - the last person who couldn't make this claim voted for LBJ.
Yup, the more I think about it, the more I believe that Mcconnell's calculus is to dump this in the democratic senate's lap, trade/muck up favors to approve Biden's cabinet appointments, and if the impeachment is indeed successful, he can gleefully point to those DURN DURTY EBIL DEMOCRAATS for impeaching the true victor of the previous election or something.
Wud yoo laek to lern aboot meatz? Look here!
it's precious he considers what he did for Trump last time a trial
i don't think it goes that far. he doesn't believe the election fraud bullshit. he just doesn't want Republicans responsible for anything
It is also more than a little worrying that the majority of the rules seem to come down to the whims of the Senate at the time. A lot of it is internal to the Senate, but barring from office could easily become a Supreme Court question. I don't particularly like the thought of this Supreme Court weighing in on it. If I get a time machine the second thing I am doing is beating the writers of the constitution until they fully write out what they mean about so god damned many things,
Me- Laughs in Amy Comey Barrett
Steam - Talon Valdez :Blizz - Talonious#1860 : Xbox Live & LoL - Talonious Monk @TaloniousMonk Hail Satan
Disqualification is explicitly in the Constitution
there's no case to argue before a court
pleasepaypreacher.net
There would be a question of being able to disqualify without a conviction.
It really seems like the smart republican move would be wait until schumer gets in, vote to convict with just enough republicans, then take the “oh so sad but what can you do really?” tack.
Trump hanging around in 2022 or running in 2024 would be poison for the Republican Party.
How many votes it takes is not was more my point. He could tantrum to the Supreme Court that it is a 2/3rds vote as there is nothing explicit one way or the other. Hopefully it will be a moot point, but I don't trust anyone in the current political climate. Also, the question monker poses.
Probably also waiting to see if the promised 50 state capitol riots plus DC inauguration riot come to pass.
There aren't enough Nazis in the country to successfully attack 50 places at once. I can believe there will be 50 protests.
Yeah especially without Trump brand hate viagara to keep them up and ready. Honestly with how muted his followers/supporters have been since being banned from twitter, it just makes twitter all the more complicit in the violence where they refused to remove him from their platform.
And once again shows Veep Harris was 100% correct when she said he should have been years ago.
pleasepaypreacher.net
This is America
Disqualification is a part of the impeachment process, but that is one way to look at it
Seems like that could be misused.
That may not actually matter for 14th amendment disqualification. It just says you can't hold office if the person "shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion". It makes no mention of conviction requirements, legal or impeachment-wise. Of course it also hasn't been used since WW1, but for that one, a House committee simply declared the Representative ineligible for office, twice, since he also won the special election to replace him.
Trump got 74 million votes. If say,1% of them are hardcore enough to actually want violence, that's still 740,000 people. Enough to put just under 15k people around every single state capitol.
The harder the rain, honey, the sweeter the sun.
That sound byte is gonna be my ringtone. I’m going to sneak it into the Christmas music at the nearby mall. I will do the Say Anything thing with a vintage boombox wired to play MP3s with it any time they make a public appearance (which I will have to go to DC to do because they never ever show their face out here where they might catch a case of plebianism from their actual constituents).
I might not be able to un-gerrymander my district enough, or un-MAGA-chud a good portion of it enough, to send them back to private life but I can help to, how does that go? Tie their name to this with a steel cord for all of history.
Your Ad Here! Reasonable Rates!
Before there was controversy or any resistance here, when they had all the energy of the GOP trying to get them there, they barely managed to get 20k of the 200k people at DC they wanted. 1% Is overestimating it.
True, but then we would have seen more at the Capitol Building and that was before consequences like firings and arrests started raining down.
Plus Trump just tossed them under the bus. Probably will still see some violence though.
Battlenet ID: MildC#11186 - If I'm in the game, send me an invite at anytime and I'll play.
And then we're going to have to listen to years of right-wing talking heads talking about how it was a giant overreaction.
Greene claims she’ll bring forth articles against Biden on 1/21
Which begs the question, do the articles count if written in half-chewed crayon?
and then eventually "we did it and it was awesome cry moar libs."
pleasepaypreacher.net
What's the charge?
He's a democrat.
Abuse of power. For a president who hasn't been in office yet.
Well using power to undo stuff my side did is abuse, obvs
they don't do much either way when you don't control the committee that sends them to the floor
Doesn't matter her bullshit isn't going anywhere.
pleasepaypreacher.net