I think you guys are a little off base with this January 3 scenario. If — when — the Democrats take back the House, Mike Johnson ceases to be Speaker at noon on the third. He will not be the one to swear in the new House. The Constitution doesn’t require that a Representative take an oath as a *precondition* of being seated; it only says they “shall be bound by oath or affirmation”; it doesn’t specify the timing of that oath. (And see my US Code citation below.) I could be wrong, but I don’t see that Johnson would have any power to stop anything — and certainly not the confirming of electoral votes (the comparison with Pence is, I think, a fallacy). That will be securely in the hands of Kamala Harris, who will still be VP at the time. (And it’s KA-mala, not Ka-MA-la. Accent on the “ka”.)
This is from 2 USC 2, §25:
“At the first session of Congress after every general election of Representatives, the oath of office shall be administered by any Member of the House of Representatives to the Speaker; and by the Speaker to all the Members and Delegates present.”
So someone else gives the oath to Speaker Jeffries, who then administers it to everyone else. Note that the statute says “administered by any Member”, implying that that person would *already* be a Member, *prior* to *their* taking of the oath. I didn’t see anything in USC 2 that specifies when the Speaker would be elected (that could be a complication, but it does seem to assume that the Speaker has already been selected); but it seems clear to me that Members become Members at noon on January 3 (Amendment XX), irrespective of when they take the oath.
And regarding the 22d Amendment, the loophole there is that it doesn’t say you can’t *serve* more than twice, it says you can’t be *elected* more than twice. I’ve discussed here earlier how Trump could take advantage of that loophole, should the worst come to pass. 🤔😉😊
It does seem bizarre (and what doesn’t these days about the claims Republicans make that have anything to do with elections) that Congresspeople could be elected and then, ant the last moment, not allowed to serve because the Speaker won’t administer oaths.
It’s definitely the kind of thing (like the President *not* having immunity) that is so obviously wrong as to never be questioned by anyone (and shouted down by everyone else if anyone was silly enough to question it.
Even though in a far more balanced world, if someone gets convicted for a crime like the former president, this should result in inevitable backlash against him, but I fear the worst from Republicans who have no shame in voting for Drumpf for president, even though he could be a convicted felon by November. That's why I tend to agree with Ben over how many voters will still flock to Trump because of the propaganda they are spoon-fed about Biden over such far-right channels as Fox News, Newsmax, and the like.
As for these soon-to-be-conducted debates, I seriously wonder if Drumpf will even attend the events. He is such a damn coward and he must realize Biden will wipe the floor with him, especially if his mic will be cut if he goes over the minumum length of time allowed him and that he won't even have an adoring crowd this time to feed off from.
Did you hear the jaw-dropping gaffe he made at one of his last rallies where he praised a fictitious character by the name of Hannibal Lecter, who was also a cannibal? The guy is mentally deranged and I'm surprised this didn't get as much coverage as it deserved from the mainstream press. No one could ascertain what he was referring to at this jarring moment.
As for the trans issue, I can't fathom why this is so incendiary among people on the far right , generally, who love to attack such vulnerable communities like this one. J.R. Rowling should be ashamed of herself after attacking a trans manager this time. As you correctly indicated, this manager isn't even a trans athlete.
As for the general election, I do feel, as you both do, that abortion will be the major issue that will defeat Drumpf and all other Republicans running.
I think you guys are a little off base with this January 3 scenario. If — when — the Democrats take back the House, Mike Johnson ceases to be Speaker at noon on the third. He will not be the one to swear in the new House. The Constitution doesn’t require that a Representative take an oath as a *precondition* of being seated; it only says they “shall be bound by oath or affirmation”; it doesn’t specify the timing of that oath. (And see my US Code citation below.) I could be wrong, but I don’t see that Johnson would have any power to stop anything — and certainly not the confirming of electoral votes (the comparison with Pence is, I think, a fallacy). That will be securely in the hands of Kamala Harris, who will still be VP at the time. (And it’s KA-mala, not Ka-MA-la. Accent on the “ka”.)
This is from 2 USC 2, §25:
“At the first session of Congress after every general election of Representatives, the oath of office shall be administered by any Member of the House of Representatives to the Speaker; and by the Speaker to all the Members and Delegates present.”
So someone else gives the oath to Speaker Jeffries, who then administers it to everyone else. Note that the statute says “administered by any Member”, implying that that person would *already* be a Member, *prior* to *their* taking of the oath. I didn’t see anything in USC 2 that specifies when the Speaker would be elected (that could be a complication, but it does seem to assume that the Speaker has already been selected); but it seems clear to me that Members become Members at noon on January 3 (Amendment XX), irrespective of when they take the oath.
And regarding the 22d Amendment, the loophole there is that it doesn’t say you can’t *serve* more than twice, it says you can’t be *elected* more than twice. I’ve discussed here earlier how Trump could take advantage of that loophole, should the worst come to pass. 🤔😉😊
I realllly want that to be true. If Johnson has no way to prevent the new Congress from taking control, all of their plans become far more difficult.
It does seem bizarre (and what doesn’t these days about the claims Republicans make that have anything to do with elections) that Congresspeople could be elected and then, ant the last moment, not allowed to serve because the Speaker won’t administer oaths.
It’s definitely the kind of thing (like the President *not* having immunity) that is so obviously wrong as to never be questioned by anyone (and shouted down by everyone else if anyone was silly enough to question it.
Even though in a far more balanced world, if someone gets convicted for a crime like the former president, this should result in inevitable backlash against him, but I fear the worst from Republicans who have no shame in voting for Drumpf for president, even though he could be a convicted felon by November. That's why I tend to agree with Ben over how many voters will still flock to Trump because of the propaganda they are spoon-fed about Biden over such far-right channels as Fox News, Newsmax, and the like.
As for these soon-to-be-conducted debates, I seriously wonder if Drumpf will even attend the events. He is such a damn coward and he must realize Biden will wipe the floor with him, especially if his mic will be cut if he goes over the minumum length of time allowed him and that he won't even have an adoring crowd this time to feed off from.
Did you hear the jaw-dropping gaffe he made at one of his last rallies where he praised a fictitious character by the name of Hannibal Lecter, who was also a cannibal? The guy is mentally deranged and I'm surprised this didn't get as much coverage as it deserved from the mainstream press. No one could ascertain what he was referring to at this jarring moment.
As for the trans issue, I can't fathom why this is so incendiary among people on the far right , generally, who love to attack such vulnerable communities like this one. J.R. Rowling should be ashamed of herself after attacking a trans manager this time. As you correctly indicated, this manager isn't even a trans athlete.
As for the general election, I do feel, as you both do, that abortion will be the major issue that will defeat Drumpf and all other Republicans running.