A Deeply Fractured US

[Fishbone Jones]

Once again, their tax returns are already public. Seems kind of a silly revenge to make something public…that’s already public…

It’s like issueing a subpoena for a public library book.

OK. We'll just wait and see what happens then. Like I say, tax returns are the least of of the dems worries.

 

[IKnowNothing]

OK. We'll just wait and see what happens then. Like I say, tax returns are the least of of the dems worries.

Elaborate. Is this like the #redwave and transparently baseless reprisal mass impeachments?

 

[Remius]

OK. We'll just wait and see what happens then. Like I say, tax returns are the least of of the dems worries.

I don’t disagree, the GOP, assuming they can get a speaker elected anytime soon, will open a series of investigations. I have no doubt that will happen.

 

[Remius]

Elaborate. Is this like the #redwave and incredibly transparent reprisal mass impeachments?

They will open investigations into Hunter Biden, the Jan 6th committee and a few other easy targets.

 

[Remius]

They will open investigations into Hunter Biden, the Jan 6th committee and a few other easy targets.

Small caveat is that this current GOP civil war taken place in congress might derail that if the Democrats are asked to make a deal to decide who will be speaker.

 

[Brad Sallows]

Impeachments are unlikely to happen unless investigations turn something up. If McCarthy is elected Speaker, he is expected to turn down the heat on impeachment. There are only 3 prominent impeachment targets - Biden, Garland, and Mayorkas. Unless a convincing line can be drawn that shows Biden opening doors for Hunter and subsequently receiving money from any deals cut by Hunter, and polls show a substantial majority of US voters believe it and are offended by it, I doubt any serious impeachment effort against Biden will be started. For Garland and Mayorkas, either corruption or incompetence might do.

 

[brihard]

Impeachments are unlikely to happen unless investigations turn something up. If McCarthy is elected Speaker, he is expected to turn down the heat on impeachment. There are only 3 prominent impeachment targets - Biden, Garland, and Mayorkas. Unless a convincing line can be drawn that shows Biden opening doors for Hunter and subsequently receiving money from any deals cut by Hunter, and polls show a substantial majority of US voters believe it and are offended by it, I doubt any serious impeachment effort against Biden will be started. For Garland and Mayorkas, either corruption or incompetence might do.

All of which would amount to nothing in the senate anyway.

 

[Brad Sallows]

All of which would amount to nothing in the senate anyway.

Unless "polls show a substantial majority of US voters believe it and are offended by it" (corruption, incompetence, deliberate failure to discharge duties of office, whatever). Everyone understands it's a political remedy, which means it's subject to popular opinion (more so now than in past). In practical terms, if the offence were sufficiently egregious, someone would quietly let the defendant know there are enough votes to convict in Senate; a reasonable person would choose to resign. I'm confident a Republican House is less likely to pursue quixotic impeachment than a Democratic one.

 

[brihard]

Unless "polls show a substantial majority of US voters believe it and are offended by it" (corruption, incompetence, deliberate failure to discharge duties of office, whatever). Everyone understands it's a political remedy, which means it's subject to popular opinion (more so now than in past). In practical terms, if the offence were sufficiently egregious, someone would quietly let the defendant know there are enough votes to convict in Senate; a reasonable person would choose to resign. I'm confident a Republican House is less likely to pursue quixotic impeachment than a Democratic one.

2020 proved that theory to be utterly bunk, but you’re free to hold on to it. Any vote in the (democrat controlled) Senate, following a House impeachment and Senate trial, would be on tight party lines. The Republicans aren’t gonna magically turn 49 senate votes into 60 for any of the matters you named. Hell, House republicans are struggling to even elect a speaker in the chamber they do control.

 

[Blackadder1916]

So for the first time in 100 years, a speaker has not been picked on the first ballot.
McCarthy lost the first ballot. The MAGA types have put a wrench in the GOP. The Democrats actually got more votes for their candidate.
No present votes yet but if that starts to happen then the pressure will be on.

2nd ballot should be interesting.

Not the best first day for the GOP as majority in Congress.

If by interesting you mean the same outcome . . . "In each of the first two rounds he secured only 203 votes."

 

[Brad Sallows]

2020 proved that theory to be utterly bunk, but you’re free to hold on to it. Any vote in the (democrat controlled) Senate, following a House impeachment and Senate trial, would be on tight party lines. The Republicans aren’t gonna magically turn 49 senate votes into 60 for any of the matters you named. Hell, House republicans are struggling to even elect a speaker in the chamber they do control.

Not bunk. What I'm talking about is the same outcome as Nixon In 1974, Americans were pissed off at Nixon. If Democrats think their future depends on jettisoning Biden or one of his officials, they're likely to do it. (They need 2/3, not 60.)

 

[brihard]

If by interesting you mean the same outcome . . . "In each of the first two rounds he secured only 203 votes."

And he’s just failed to get the necessary votes on the third ballot; remains to be seen if the end result will differ.

What a clown show.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If by interesting you mean the same outcome . . . "In each of the first two rounds he secured only 203 votes."

It was more interesting. The dissenters united behind Jordan, after Jordan nominated McCarthy. That looks a little closer to resolution than the first attempt.

Pretty much everyone interested in the matter knew going in this was not going to be a formality. Essentially, there is some negotiation going on to get some commitments out of McCarthy.

 

[brihard]

Not bunk. What I'm talking about is the same outcome as Nixon In 1974, Americans were pissed off at Nixon. If Democrats think their future depends on jettisoning Biden or one of his officials, they're likely to do it. (They need 2/3, not 60.)

Thanks, brain fart on the 60 vs 2/3, but it really only reinforces my point.

There’s absolutely no reason Democrats would vote in the senate to support an impeachment of Biden et al. This is not Nixon ‘74, and There’s nothing Biden or other prominent democrats have done that comes close to that.

That’s not to say that house Republicans may not push impeachment anyway for partisan theatrics, but that would be effectively dead the moment it reached the senate.

 

[Remius]

It was more interesting. The dissenters united behind Jordan, after Jordan nominated McCarthy. That looks a little closer to resolution than the first attempt.

Pretty much everyone interested in the matter knew going in this was not going to be a formality. Essentially, there is some negotiation going on to get some commitments out of McCarthy.

If McCarthy loses more support on this ballot, will he conceded to certain demands? There are about 5 never Mcarthy voters. So concession may not work. Resolution may still be some way further yet to come.

 

[Brad Sallows]

There’s absolutely no reason Democrats would vote in the senate to support an impeachment of Biden et al. This is not Nixon ‘74, and There’s nothing Biden or other prominent democrats have done that comes close to that.

Nothing proven.

There are two plausible scenarios, both involving the same general idea, but different players. They go like this: Biden assists Hunter with introductions to people in a country either unfriendly to the US or notorious for its corruption; Hunter makes deals that no reasonable person can explain based on Hunter's apparently dissolute irresponsible life and lack of high-value skills; money from the deals ends up in Biden's pocket. The suspect countries are Ukraine and China. The parts about Hunter tagging along with his father and pursuing big money deals that no-one can imagine Hunter deserving are already known. It's the last part that would have to be sold to voters.

That's all that has to be shown. If that's shown and opinion polls show Democrats essentially losing independents along with some registered Democrats unless they throw out Biden, I suspect they'll throw out Biden. They'd need to do it before the primaries start, otherwise it would be even messier for them if Biden has chosen to run again (rumours he will announce one way or the other soon enough). If a Republican congressional committee uncovers just those points of evidence and throws it out to the public and Biden elects to run again, Republicans might just leave Democrats to deal with the mess, without pursuing impeachment.

I haven't come across any other scenario which would incite public opinion strongly enough. It's either those, or nothing.

 

[Brad Sallows]

If McCarthy loses more support on this ballot, will he conceded to certain demands? There are about 5 never Mcarthy voters. So concession may not work. Resolution may still be some way further yet to come.

Everyone has a price. Obviously one of the prices is "not McCarthy". But there may be something of value short of that, that someone can offer to each dissenter.

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Thanks, brain fart on the 60 vs 2/3, but it really only reinforces my point.

There’s absolutely no reason Democrats would vote in the senate to support an impeachment of Biden et al. This is not Nixon ‘74, and There’s nothing Biden or other prominent democrats have done that comes close to that.

That’s not to say that house Republicans may not push impeachment anyway for partisan theatrics, but that would be effectively dead the moment it reached the senate.

Do they have to though? Bringing Hunter down and implicating his dad in the process, will effectively end Biden's career and anything he has to say or put forward ever again. It'll be a lame duck presidency. No need to impeach Biden. He can be damaged beyond repair without impeachment. Then we'll see whether the DOJ is partisan or not. Will they investigate and charge him? I expect, if they get to close with Hunter, he may step down because of senility problems, which effectively stops him testifying or being culpable.

Just a thought, nothing to hang a hat on.

 

[brihard]

Thanks, brain fart on the 60 vs 2/3, but it really only reinforces my point.

Do they have to though? Bringing Hunter down and implicating his dad in the process, will effectively end Biden's career and anything he has to say or put forward ever again. It'll be a lame duck presidency. No need to impeach Biden. He can be damaged beyond repair without impeachment. Then we'll see whether the DOJ is partisan or not. Will they investigate and charge him? I expect, if they get to close with Hunter, he may step down because of senility problems, which effectively stops him testifying or being culpable.

Just a thought, nothing to hang a hat on.

That’s certainly a theory.

 

[Blackadder1916]

And he’s just failed to get the necessary votes on the third ballot; remains to be seen if the end result will differ.

What a clown show.

Kevin McCarthy odds improve to be Speaker of the House during 12th floor vote

Update 3:05 p.m. McCarthy is down to needing to flip three of six! He moved all of one vote on Ballot No. 13, which was Andy Harris of Maryland. Also

dknation.draftkings.com

Update 4:55 p.m. Third ballot results:

Jefferies: 212
McCarthy: 202
Jordan: 20

McCarthy actually lost a vote via Byron Donalds, and now PredictIt now has Steve Scalise as the favorite at .39, McCarthy at .38, Jordan at .13, and Stefanik at .06.

What's the over/under on when a speaker gets elected? I go for Friday (maybe late Thursday).