“There is nothing more exhilarating than being shot without getting any results.” – winston churchill
Rest assured, the late Secretary of War William Belknap. He remains the only U.S. cabinet member ever to be impeached.
At this point.
The House of Representatives impeached Belknap in 1876.
The House of Representatives failed to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas in 2024.
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Why Representatives Are Chosen Blake Moore flips from support to denial on Mayorkas’ impeachment
At this point.
Belknap’s ignominious place in American history remains intact. Because one lawmaker needed emergency surgery. Then, when the ailing congressman showed up unexpectedly at the Capitol, the House lacked the votes to thrust Mayorkas into the elite hall occupied only by Belknap.
The Hippocratic Oath may say, “Do no harm.” But he said nothing about hurting impeachment.
Republicans have made Mayorkas’ impeachment a test of the 119th Congress. And after all the fuss about the border, Mayorkas’ performance, and countless other grievances, House Republicans stumbled where it really mattered.
U.S. Department of Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas speaks to the media to outline security plans for Super Bowl Week at the Mandalay Bay Convention Center on February 7, 2024 in Las Vegas, Nevada. (Candice Ward/Getty Images)
The effort to impeach Mayorkas failed.
The vote was close. As I really said on live TV during the vote, it’s tougher than wearing new shoes on a rainy day.
215 Yes. 215 No.
Three Republicans voted against it: Mike Gallagher (R-Wis.), Tom McClintock (R-Calif.), and Ken Buck (R-Colo.).
But by rules, the tie vote loses in the House.
House Republican Conference Chairman Blake Moore (R-Utah), who ranks fifth in Republican support, suddenly voted against the bill.
Republicans have four no’s!
The vote was 214 in favor to 216 against.
The gig is over. The House will not impeach Mayorkas.
Sen.Rand Paul accuses Republican leadership of ‘dragging’ caucus to ‘void’ bipartisan border bill with Democrats
So why did Mr. Moore, a senior member of the leadership, change his vote? Change of heart? Was this “Invasion of the Body Snatchers”? Has he become a traitor to his own party?
none of the above.
Mr. Moore’s “no” vote on impeaching Mayorkas deserves an asterisk when compared to Mr. Gallagher, Mr. McClintock, and Mr. Buck’s votes. Mr. Moore wants Mr. Mayorkas impeached. In fact, Mr. Moore’s maneuver preserved the Republican strategy of potentially impeaching Mr. Mayorkas in the future.
In other words:
Under House rules, members of the prevailing side of a roll call vote (in this case, the NAYS) can “reconsider” their vote. In other words, request a re-vote.
Moore was in favor, but on the losing side. Mr. Gallagher, Mr. McClintock and Mr. Buck certainly did not intend to move to order a new vote. They opposed impeachment. That’s why someone in the Republican leadership needed to switch the vote to a no, potentially reviving the plan to impeach Mr. Mayorkas.
Moore changed his vote to “no.” Not because he opposes Mayorkas’ impeachment. “But now he was on the ‘winning’ side.” House Republicans could call another vote to impeach Mayorkas. In fact, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-Louisiana) probably would have changed his vote had he been present. “He is out for cancer treatment and has not voted this year. If Mr. Scalise returns, there is a possibility that the Republican Party will receive votes. If the Republicans win next week’s Long Island special election, the Republican Party may receive reinforcements. “Republicans hope Republican candidate Maji Melesa Pilip will defeat former Rep. Tom” for the vacant seat previously held by ousted former Rep. George Santos (New York, NY). If Mr. Suozzi (D.N.Y.) supports this, there is a possibility that the Republicans will get an impeachment vote.
(Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)
Scalise will be back. But if Mr. Suozzi defeats Mr. Pilip, Republicans may never have the votes to impeach Mr. Mayorkas.
House Republicans made a huge failure on impeachment. They violated fundamental tenets of the Capitol.
the everytime About mathematics.
The House held two roll call votes early Tuesday. A total of 425 of the 431 members of the House of Representatives voted. After the House finished its lengthy debate on Mayorkas’ impeachment, it was time for another series of votes. However, Republicans decided not to vote on impeachment first. Instead, the House passed the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal National Historical Park Commission Extension Act with a first vote.
It turned out to be a tactical mistake on the part of the Republicans. It created a false sense of security about Mayorkas’ vote.
Republicans had wanted the House to vote on the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal bill first so they could get a complete picture of who would vote. The canal bill will be a “test” for determining how many members of the Republican majority could lose in an impeachment case.
That’s a wise move. But it backfired.
Senate to vote on funding for Israel, Ukraine as immigration deal comes under fire
Prioritizing the canal bill could scuttle impeachment.
cry me a river.
The House approved the Chesapeake and Ohio Canal bill by a vote of 427-2. The total number of votes cast thus increased from 425 earlier in the day to a new high of 429. He was the only person absent. Congressman Al Green (D-Texas) was out for surgery with Mr. Scalise.
But here’s a problem.
Republicans were not counting on Green Party votes. Aides and medical workers dramatically rolled Greene into the Capitol in a wheelchair. He was wearing a blue hospital gown and tan foot shoes.
When Greene voted against impeachment, the number of senators voting suddenly swelled to 430.
A senior House Democratic aide confided on Fox that voting for the Chesapeake-Ohio Canal helped Democrats “hide” Greene. That lulled Republicans into an illusory sense of security. They thought they had the votes to impeach, not knowing that Democrats were trying to stop them.
Green may have been lying face down on a hospital gurney earlier in the day. But that didn’t mean impeachment couldn’t end.
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) defended the surprise appearance of Rep. Al Green (D-Texas), who voted against the impeachment effort against Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas on Tuesday. . (Getty)
“He will be there to vote against this sham impeachment led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) and targeting hard-working public servants like Secretary Mayorkas. It made it clear to me that it was important,” said House Minority Whip Hakeem Jeffries of New York.
Jeffries noted that he did not ask Greene to swoop in to avoid an impeachment vote. This was all green.
So Republicans had a choice. Will it be rejected 215-215? Or save your options for later.
Republicans chose the latter.
Of course, impeachment resolutions have “privileges.” That means any member can introduce an impeachment plan again and the House would have to take it up. But by keeping the current text in place, Republicans would also preserve current investigations, committee reports and other documents. It would also give Republicans more credibility if they were to introduce articles of impeachment to the Senate during a potential trial.
This is the only time the House has ever rejected an article of impeachment. The House of Representatives adopted only two articles of impeachment brought against former President Clinton in December 1997.
Therefore, Republicans may try to impeach him again in the future. Maybe Scalise is here. Maybe Pilip will win. But we can never know exactly how many people will be present in the House of Commons.
you Try getting 431 people in the same room at the same time. Members are always absent for some reason. disease. family promise. Funeral. Events within the district. You name it.
So Republicans attacked Mr. Mayorkas. And missed.
Click to get the FOX News app
At this point.
As Churchill said, it must have been an exhilarating feeling for Mayorkas.
Republicans attacked. And no results were obtained.
I was foiled by a man in a hospital gown.
