That last little fragment being the primary issue of this impeachment (from my perspective, to insure that there is no doubt that this is Trump’s last go-around in U.S. electoral theater, and not just in federal government, but in any elected public office in the U.S.
Do you know if McConnell has said he’ll agree to bring the Senate back in session? Either per agreement with Schumer, under the rule I posted the other night, or per agreement of all senators? Unless I see he’s willing to call Senators back, I feel like he’s just enticing the House to send the articles early.
Just as an FYI, that resolution (S.Res. 296 (2004)) is under the Nonstatutory Standing Orders, Section 60, of the Senate Manual.
Want to add a disturbing element to all of this:
GOP members feel under threat for their lives and families.
That resolution includes the Constitutional exception from Article I section5 Clause 4:
“Neither House, during the Session of Congress, shall, without the Consent of the other, adjourn for more than three days, nor to any other Place than that in which the two Houses shall be sitting.”
To me, that means the House can withdraw consent and force the Senate into session within three days.
The Senate is holding pro-forma sessions to get around that:
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that upon the dissolution of the Joint Session, the Senate stand adjourned to then convene for pro forma sessions only, with no business being conducted on the following dates and times, and that following each pro forma
session, the Senate adjourn until the next pro forma session: Friday, January 8, at 10 a.m.; Tuesday, January 12, at 12:30 p.m.; Friday,
January 15, at 10 a.m. I further ask that when the Senate adjourns on Friday January 15, it next convene at 12 noon on Tuesday, January 19;
From what I just read, McConnell’s holding his cards until the House acts.
McConnell says no to reconvening under the emergency rule. Trial blocked until the 19th.
I still maintain per our discussion earlier in this thread that the Senate is Constitutionally forced to address articles of impeachment “immediately”. From what I’ve read, it seems that this is an area of dispute that has never really been looked at by the courts. Clearly McConnell has the upper hand as he is the one interpreting the rules and court relief would take us past the 19th anyways. So for practical purposes my argument is worth zip.
If it means anything, I wish your interpretation held sway. But since the Senate agreed unanimously to adjourn save pro-forma sessions to get around Article I, Section 5, we are stuck. This is why I believe the Democratic caucus made a mistake agreeing to adjourn. Given the circumstances, I suspect they weren’t exactly clear-headed and can’t completely fault them though.
Impeachment isn’t “normal” Senate “business,” Impeachment demands the fulfillment of constitutional mandates and requirements which I believe even supersedes other “emergency” conditions (disaster, war, etc.) as without political order no other order or condition can be addressed.
Agreed. But if you read up in my comments and those of @dpearl, you’ll see what the problem is (with some citations). In fact, McConnell is saying he agrees that it’s privileged business and the Senate will take up impeachment when it returns. This could delay appointments and other things critical to get a solid start in the new administration.
As it should.
Nothing is more important than attending to this national disaster first, and that may well include the ejection of, and charges against, sitting and newly elected members of the House and Senate who were participants and facilitators of Treason against the United Sates of America
I dunno. To have the Biden administration sucked into a pause over impeachment trial delays organized by McConnell would not be smart. Barring agreement from McConnell, better to have Schumer oversee arrangements for a trial, where he could direct proceedings to a committee to receive evidence and testimony while moving other business forward.
Remember: just a week ago we were clamoring for stimulus checks to go to the floor. From my reading, unless McConnell agrees to move quickly, he could put a lot of sand in the gears, valuable time that the administration, already behind due to Trump transition intransigence, will have to make up.
Just want to share a great commentary in the Post that goes to your point about impeachment and pardons:
The author points to a scholarly dispute over tying the pardon exception to conviction, and argues that’s not what the text suggests. She also notes the following important point:
By stripping the president of his ability to pardon himself and others inciting or participating in the insurrection, Congress would limit Trump’s ability to continue to interfere in investigations of his own wrongdoing, something he has done repeatedly and could continue to do in his last days in office if he uses the power to pardon unchecked.
If the issue goes to the Supreme Court, it’ll be interesting to see what the so-called textualists and originalists say.
I see where you are coming from, but to my considerations, there is nothing more important than holding Traitors within our own government to account for their crimes ahead of any and all other priorities. Until these people are held to account, they will continue to damage our nation and all of its efforts.
It’s almost a week later, but what I recall was that you went heavy on procedural matters, delineating and delineating until any normal person’s eyes would glaze over.