77
submitted 9 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

House Republicans are eyeing a redo on impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas this week after the conference fell short of penalizing the embattled Cabinet head in a stunning — and embarrassing — fashion.

The House is slated to hold another vote on impeaching Mayorkas on Tuesday, which Republicans expect to be successful, as Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) returns to the Capitol following cancer treatment. If all members are present and vote the same way as last week, and Scalise is supportive of impeachment, the effort will just squeak by.

top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world 44 points 9 months ago

This is turning out to be their next buttery males, which was their next Benghazi, which was their next Fast And Furious etc.

Anything to get out of actually acting in good faith and, you know, governing.

[-] Jaysyn@kbin.social 27 points 9 months ago

Desperate fascists are desperate.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 23 points 9 months ago

That shouldn't even be legal.

[-] SinningStromgald@lemmy.world 17 points 9 months ago

It's the only "governing" they know and want to do.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

Which is exactly why it shouldn't be legal.

Congress should not be allowed to vote for the same thing over and over.

[-] Telorand@reddthat.com 5 points 9 months ago

You can't be tried for the same thing over and over again in different courts, much less the same one. The Double Jeopardy doctrine should apply to Congress as well.

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

At the very least, you should have to wait until the next session.

[-] ira@lemmy.ml 1 points 9 months ago

So you don't think they should be able to try to vote on Ukraine aid again since the vote failed in the House?

[-] FlyingSquid@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

Would there be a point to it? Is it going to magically pass the house the next time this session somehow?

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 22 points 9 months ago

They have to try it today, the special election for Santos's seat is today. While the outcome is not certain, there is a snowstorm blowing through Long Island and all the MAGAs don't trust early voting so I think the Democrat may have an edge there. Assuming he wins, then Republicans will not have the votes to do it until the special election for McCarthy's seat next month (which ought to go Republican)

[-] Fapper_McFapper@lemmy.world 19 points 9 months ago

Republicans, conservatives, GOP, whatever you want to call them are a clear and present danger to our democracy. Eventually, I hope, we the people will act accordingly.

[-] Nougat@kbin.social 3 points 9 months ago

Republicans, conservatives, GOP, whatever you want to call them ...

Fascists.

[-] Rozz@lemmy.sdf.org 11 points 9 months ago

Hold on, I fucked up. Do-over!

[-] autotldr@lemmings.world 1 points 9 months ago

This is the best summary I could come up with:


House Republicans are eyeing a redo on impeaching Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas this week after the conference fell short of penalizing the embattled Cabinet head in a stunning — and embarrassing — fashion.

Back on the House side, lawmakers may consider legislation related to the nation’s warrantless surveillance powers this week after Congress approved a short-term extension of the authority last year.

And all eyes will be on New York’s 3rd Congressional District this week as voters head to the polls to select a successor to former Rep. George Santos (R-N.Y.), who was expelled from Congress last year.

Support for Kyiv has become a hot-button issue in the House GOP conference, with an increasing number of Republican lawmakers becoming skeptical of additional aid for the embattled U.S. ally.

The House may vote on legislation related to the U.S.’s warrantless surveillance powers this week, according to the schedule from Scalise’s office, bringing the hot-button issue back to the forefront after lawmakers failed to reach a consensus on reforms last year.

But if Suozzi wins his seat back, flipping the district from red to blue, the House split would be 219-213, meaning Republicans can only lose two of their own on party-line votes with full attendance and still get their efforts over the finish line.


The original article contains 1,393 words, the summary contains 214 words. Saved 85%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!

this post was submitted on 13 Feb 2024
77 points (96.4% liked)

politics

19144 readers
1352 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS