i hope he goes for straight dismissal.. not that the house would be aware enough to care how much time they wasted, but it would be nice to see it shoved back in their faces as useless.
this post was submitted on 26 Feb 2024
73 points (98.7% liked)
politics
19072 readers
4412 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Why wouldn't they just not punish him at all? Like the senate did for Trump twice?
Technically they went to trial for Trump's impeachment in the senate both times. The first "trial" didn't call any witnesses or subpoena any testimony and was very brief. The second impeachment had more of an actual trial since democrats just barely controlled the senate for that one, though unfortunately still failed with 57 on favor (needs 66), though did get 7 republicans to vote to bar him from office.
Commenter above you is referring to just dismissing outright, which would be faster than what the senate did for Trump, even the first time. I agree that's what the senate should do though, just dismiss outright, this impeachment was a joke political stunt and they didn't even allege anything to discuss.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Senators are set to deal with the impeachment of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in swift fashion this week as they look ahead to a pair of government funding deadlines.
No matter which he chooses, members on both sides of the aisle widely expect the chamber to spend the minimal amount of time possible on the topic, especially with government funding on the front burner.
There has been increasing skepticism from corners of the Senate GOP conference who question whether Mayorkas — who has no shortage of detractors among the membership — reached the bar of high crimes and misdemeanors and whether impeaching him was a good use of time.
They also have wondered aloud whether impeachment is the correct remedy as some believe Mayorkas is simply carrying out the Biden administration’s agenda, and that an ouster of the secretary wouldn’t change much.
The two impeachment articles accuse Mayorkas of refusing to comply with immigration laws passed by Congress and of obstructing and misleading congressional oversight.
He also noted the conference has not discussed the Mayorkas impeachment at recent lunches and meetings, the last of which came during as the chamber debated and ultimately passed the national security supplemental.
The original article contains 1,030 words, the summary contains 199 words. Saved 81%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
“The Biden administration’s irredeemable. There’s just nothing they can do at this point. There’s no executive order he can issue. There’s nothing else that can restore his credibility on the border,” Cramer said. “This is all on him. In fact, anything he does to correct it is an admission of his own failures.”
Typical Republican. No matter what the person does we still hate them, and if they do change their mind, they’re weak.