All posts tagged "senate"

Impeachment plan for two GOP Supreme Court judges floated: 'Reasons for removal'

Democratic Party candidate Graham Platner has outlined a plan to impeach two sitting Supreme Court judges.

Platner, who is running for the Democratic nomination for US Senate in Maine, told NBC there are reasonable grounds for the removal of Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas. Alito and Thomas have faced significant ethical scrutiny during Trump's second term. Alito authored the majority opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, which overturned Roe v. Wade, a decision that sparked widespread controversy and calls for his recusal from abortion-related cases.

Thomas has been embroiled in controversy also, with recent calls for his removal from the Supreme Court following a speech where he denounced progressive politics.

During an appearance at University of Texas Austin Law School, Thomas said, "Progressivism seeks to replace the basic premises of the Declaration of Independence and hence our form of government."

Platner has since called for the impeachment of both sitting judges. He said there is a "compelling case" against both Alito and Thomas. "The relationship between Clarence Thomas and Harlan Crow is not hard to see as clearly corrupt, and Justice Thomas doesn’t even recuse himself from cases that impact Crow’s businesses," he said.

Platner added that he is "definitely open to doing more, including adding seats on the court." He also outlined a plan, should the Democratic Party win a majority in the Senate, to investigate Donald Trump's administration.

“I want to shut the White House down,” Platner said. “I want us to, for the next two years, be dragging every single person in the White House, every single person in all these agencies that have been conducting themselves in illegal and unconstitutional ways. They need to be dragged by subpoena in front of Senate committees over and over and over again."

A Supreme Court justice can be impeached through a constitutional process outlined in Article II of the U.S. Constitution. The House of Representatives must vote to impeach the justice, requiring a simple majority, by charging them with "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Following House impeachment, the Senate conducts a trial where the justice can present a defense. A two-thirds majority vote in the Senate is required to convict and remove the justice from office.

No Supreme Court justice has ever been successfully impeached and removed through this process, though several have faced impeachment attempts throughout American history for various alleged misconduct and ethical violations.

Convicting Trump is no longer a pipe dream

Friends,

Speaking at a January 6 retreat for House Republicans, Trump stated, “You gotta win the midterms ‘cause, if we don’t win the midterms, it’s just gonna be — I mean, they’ll find a reason to impeach me. I’ll get impeached.”

This was before Trump’s agents murdered Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, before the Justice Department released more Epstein files, before Trump’s disastrous war in Iran, before Trump threatened death to the entire Iranian civilization, before a gallon of gas hit $4 or more, before other prices also began rising because of the blockage of the Strait of Hormuz, and before additional price hikes associated with Trump’s tariffs had kicked in.

It was also before Trump’s polls slid to record lows, before the MAGA faithful began complaining that Trump had betrayed his promise to avoid foreign entanglements, and before a slew of special elections in which Democratic candidates have won Republican districts (and even when they didn’t win, lost by far smaller margins than Trump won by in 2024).

Until recently, I thought impeaching Trump and convicting him in the Senate was a pipe dream. I was concerned that even talk of impeachment at this stage might distract attention from the affordability crisis brought on by Trump and could even fortify Republican charges of Democratic “extremism.”

No longer.

The president of the United States is stark-raving mad. He’s a clear and present danger to America and the world. The American public is beginning to see it.

We’ve got to do whatever we legally can to remove him from office. The 25th Amendment would be useful if Trump’s Cabinet and key advisers had any integrity, but they don’t. They’re ambitious, unprincipled traitors.

Which leaves impeachment.

You may be skeptical. After all, he’s already been impeached twice, to no avail. How can the third time be the charm?

Because it seems likely that Democrats will retake control of the House and the Senate in this fall’s midterm elections (unless Trump prevents free and fair elections).

And because it’s also possible that there will be enough votes in the Senate starting next January to convict Trump of impeachable offenses and send him packing.

I understand how difficult this may seem. Both times Trump was impeached in the House, he was saved by the Constitution’s requirement that two-thirds of the Senate (67 senators, assuming all 100 are present) convict in order to remove a president.

The highest Senate vote count against Trump came in 2021, and it was 10 votes short of the constitutional requirement. Fifty-seven senators, including seven Republicans, voted to convict him of inciting an insurrection at the U.S. Capitol. It was the most bipartisan impeachment vote in U.S. Senate history, but it still fell well short of the 67 votes needed to convict Trump.

So why do I think it’s possible now? Because public sentiment has swung further against Trump now than it was in 2021. And it’s likely to swing even further against him, because he’s going out of his mind at a rapid rate.

The way to accomplish this is to defeat enough incumbent Republican senators who are up for reelection in 2026 to create a Democratic majority in that chamber, totaling some 54 votes, and pressure at least 13 Republicans up for reelection in 2028 to vote to convict him.

That’s not impossible. In the upcoming midterms, it’s likely that Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins will be replaced by a Democrat (either Janet Mills or Graham Platner). I also assume that former North Carolina Governor Roy Cooper will replace Republican Senator Thom Tillis, who’s retiring.

And I’d like to believe that the good people of Ohio will see the light and reelect Sherrod Brown over Jon Husted, the dullard who was appointed to fill the remainder of JD Vance’s term.

James Talarico could take the Texas Republican Senate seat now occupied by John Cornyn. In Alaska, I’d put odds on Mary Peltola defeating incumbent Republican Senator Dan Sullivan. In Nebraska, assume that Dan Osborn prevails over incumbent Republican Senator Pete Ricketts. And so on.

Republican senators last elected in 2022 who will be on the ballot in November 2028 include some who are vulnerable because they’re in swing states, such as North Carolina’s Ted Budd and Wisconsin’s Ron Johnson; or are in states that could be competitive, such as Indiana’s Todd Young; or are vulnerable to internal party shifts, such as Louisiana’s John Kennedy and South Carolina’s Tim Scott.

Those vulnerabilities mean that their constituents could push them to vote to convict Trump in an impeachment, or else threaten to vote against them in 2028.

So it’s possible to get the 67 Senate votes, my friends. And it’s absolutely necessary that we try.

The vast No Kings demonstrations should be considered a prelude to targeting enough Republican Senate incumbents and open races to flip the Senate this fall, and pressuring Republicans up for reelection in 2028 to do their constitutional duty.

Now is the time to show the size and intensity of America’s commitment to removing Trump from office, for the good of us all.

Robert Reich is an emeritus professor of public policy at Berkeley and former secretary of labor. His writings can be found at https://robertreich.substack.com/. His new memoir, Coming Up Short, can be found wherever you buy books. You can also support local bookstores nationally by ordering the book at bookshop.org

'This could end poorly': GOP had 'ugly' scramble in lead-up to big Senate choice

The Republican Party found itself extinguishing fires up to the very last moments of confirming a Senate candidate for this year's midterm elections.

White House insiders were keen to maintain the Donald Trump-endorsed candidate, Brenda Wilson, for the Indiana seat. But staffers found themselves fighting off a growing interest in Alexandra Wilson, with the long-time Trump supporter initially asked to drop from the race. But she refused to do so, and from there, Alexandra Wilson found herself in frequent, combative discussions with three Trump administration aides.

Alexandra Wilson, speaking to NBC News, claims political director Matt Brasseaux, deputy chief of staff James Blair and Midwest regional political director Marshall Moreau — as well as Indiana Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith; Gov. Mike Braun’s chief of staff, Joshua Kelley; and a staffer for the conservative group Club for Growth, Evan Oudekerk, all contacted her in the hopes of having her abandon her Senate primary pitch.

Incentives and threats were made to Alexandra Wilson, the hopeful candidate claimed, as a way of trying to pressure her out of racing against the Trump-approved candidate, Brenda Wilson. State Senator Greg Goode had been in the running also, but had voted against Trump's wishes.

Gov. Micah Beckwith had aired his concern over Alexandra Wilson running with conservative group Turning Point Action in the hopes they would stir some Republican Party members to convince her to drop out.

"I just said I don’t know if you guys really thought this one through, because this probably could end poorly for this woman," Beckwith said.

Further pressure from Blair came in the form of a phone call with Alexandra Wilson, with the would-be Senate candidate grilled for her past arrest. She resolved this with a plea deal for a misdemeanor charge, calling it a "poor choice" she made "right after my mother passed away".

Blair continued his pressure on Alexandra Wilson, claiming the candidate she runs against for the Senate seat would use the arrest as ammunition for a political advertisement.

"I think that they’re going to run television ads on it. I think they’re going to run mail pieces on it,” Blair said of her past arrest. “They’re going to tell every voter in the district about this kind of stuff. Because they don’t have to tell your side of the story. They will tell the side of the story they want people to hear.

"I just wanted to talk about that brass-tacks reality that I think is going to be really ugly. And I think we’re sort of working at cross purposes with two people with the same last name on the ballot."

Alexandra Wilson is, at the time of writing (April 10), still listed on the May 5 primary ballot. This could change should an appeal to the Election Commission from conservative attorney Jim Bopp, a supporter of Brenda Wilson's campaign, be successful.

The commission's previous vote had a 2- 2 deadlock on whether to keep Alexandra Wilson on the ballot.

'Zero respect': GOP civil war erupts as House and Senate feud hits breaking point

The relationship between Republican Party representatives in the House and Senate has never been worse, according to various insiders.

Unnamed GOP lawmakers from both the House and Senate made their thoughts clear on the divisions currently undermining the party. A fix for the Department of Homeland Security freeze pitched by the Senate was trashed by the House, with a boiling point reached, according to NOTUS. Insiders say the divide has only worsened over the last few months, with reps from the upper and lower chambers making clear their thoughts on the tension.

An anonymous House Republican said, "The Senate clearly, like transparently, has zero respect for the House at all. There’s this idea that they are far superior to us intellectually, that they understand issues better than we do. The Senate sees the House as a bunch of sort of barbarians or Philistines, and they’re the enlightened ones."

A separate, senior GOP aide added, "The Senate is still acting like the Senate, which is why the House hates it. It’s sort of ignoring the House’s plight. I think leadership’s trying to be sensitive to that, but members aren’t.

"Even if the relationships are not at an all-time low, the functioning is at an all-time low." Even House Speaker Mike Johnson and Senate Majority Leader John Thune reportedly do not "respect or trust" one another.

Johnson's aide alleged there was no battle between House and Senate at the moment, and that the GOP is focused solely on pushing through potential divisions.

"Johnson has consistently emphasized the importance of House and Senate Republicans working closely together as one team, and he has worked hard to ensure it," the unnamed senior aide said.

"That cooperation and trust have been the reasons for the landmark achievements of the 119th Congress, in spite of our historically small margins. The stakes are too high to allow any division to develop now."

'Most painful, most awkward': GOP rep moans about 'messy' government standstill

A Republican lawmaker has criticized their own party for an ongoing disagreement with the Democratic Party.

Frustrated Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) said the back and forth over reopening the Department of Homeland Security is par for the course under President Donald Trump's administration. He told CNN, "We do it the hardest, most painful, most awkward, most drawn out miserable way, but eventually we get it done. This is a classic example of that."

The DHS began its partial shutdown six weeks ago following a partial funding lapse that is yet to be resolved. The US Senate has, as of today (March 27), voted to end the 40-day shutdown, so long as immigration enforcement is excluded from reopening. The deal now faces a vote in the House of Representatives.

Fellow GOP representatives were openly critical of how long the shutdown had gone on.

Rep. Jeff Van Drew (R-NJ) said, "I mean, we've got to, for God's sake, we've got to open this piece of government up."

The bill set to be reviewed by the House does not feature reforms the GOP had pushed for, specifically increased funding for Immigration and Customs Enforcement.

There is also an omission regarding Border Patrol, with money for the immigration team absent from the most recent proposal. Republican Party support is not at all guaranteed for the bill either, with House Appropriations Chairman Tom Cole saying, "I don't even know what it is yet."

Republican Senate Majority Leader John Thune, speaking from the chamber earlier Friday, added, "Trump should never have had to step in to rescue TSA workers and US air travel.

"We're here because, thanks to Democrats' determined refusal to reach an agreement, there will be no Homeland Security funding bill this year. Instead... Republicans funded the Department of Homeland Security piecemeal," Thune added. "That is not the way to fund the department."

Senate scrambles for DHS deal before two-week recess: 'Time for us to do our job'

WASHINGTON — Lawmakers were cautiously optimistic on Thursday as the Senate was trying to reach a deal to fund the Department of Homeland Security and end the government shutdown.

In a series of exclusive interviews with Raw Story, several senators explained how they were uncertain whether a deal could be reached as Congress was just hours away from its two-week April recess.

Sen. Katie Britt (R-AL) was asked if she was hopeful the Senate could reach an agreement to fund DHS.

"We'll see, but I certainly think it's time for us to do our job," Britt said.

The discussions were still ongoing Thursday afternoon.

"We're reviewing that right now," said Sen. Angus King (I-ME).

Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) was hesitant to say what the caucuses were discussing and if the lawmakers were closer to reaching a deal.

"I don't want to say one way or the other," Schatz said.

Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) signaled that senators had more to work out together, but there was one area where everyone was on the same page.

"I think the good news is that there is very broad agreement that we have to fund TSA," Coons said. "Bad news is that there's not yet agreement on sort of exactly how to."

Coons also said that Democrats did not plan to budge on their demands for ICE and were still focused on agency reforms, adding that new Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin said during his confirmation hearing that he would take a closer look at those suggestions.

"It's Thursday," Coons added. "Wouldn't it be great to resolve this?"

CNN's Dana Bash taken aback as Senate hearing devolves into 'Real Housewives' episode

CNN host Dana Bash cracked a joke on Wednesday as the heated hearing for Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-OK) developed into a fiery back-and-forth similar to the popular reality show franchise.

The broadcaster dropped the Bravo reference after Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) faced off with Mullin over whether he was the right person to lead the Department of Homeland Security after the nominee approved of a violent attack against the Kentucky Republican. Mullin, who President Donald Trump has selected to replace outgoing Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, was grilled by Paul and other senators in a series of tough questions about his anger, temperament and concerns over his "classified work" outside the United States.

"Back with my panel meanwhile, on the Real Housewives of the U.S. Senate, this is, you know, I mean, it's actually, it is a serious issue that Rand Paul is trying to get at, which he said is, you know, character and that questioning whether he has anger issues," Bash said.

Paul has threatened to cancel his vote to approve Mullin for the DHS job.

"It was also noteworthy that Senator Mullin brought with him his now friend, Sean O'Brien, the head of the Teamsters, who sat right within camera shot because one of the reasons why people first learned of Senator Mullin is when he almost got into a fistfight with Mr. O'Brien when Senator Mullin was asking him questions at a hearing they smoked the peace pipe — metaphorically — they are now friends," Bash said. "And so there's no question in my mind that that's why he had O'Brien back there because he knew what was coming from Rand Paul."

James Carville 'rattled' by one 'tied' race: 'Should scare the hell out of every Democrat'

Famed political strategist James Carville sounded the alarm on Saturday, admitting he's "rattled" by one key political contest.

Carville, known for his work on Bill Clinton's team, said over the weekend, "I’ve worked on more campaigns than I can count, and let me tell you: I don’t rattle easily." He went on to note that, "But this race in New Hampshire? It’s TIED. In a dead heat. And that should scare the hell out of every Democrat in the country."

The fear surrounds a "wide open" seat, according to the legendary politico.

"Here’s the deal: Jeanne Shaheen is retiring. That means this seat is wide open. And now John Sununu — yes, one of those Sununus, the long-time New Hampshire political dynasty — is running to flip it red," he added Saturday. "He’s got the name, he’s got the money, and he’s got the full weight of the Republican donor class behind him — from Wall Street to the far-right Super PACs. They see New Hampshire as their ticket to locking down the Senate for another decade."

He went on to characterize the race as "neck-and-neck."

"And right now? This race is neck-and-neck. It could go either way," the strategist claimed. "Chris Pappas is our guy. He’s won the toughest district in New Hampshire four times. He knows how to reach voters across the aisle and build a coalition that wins. But he cannot — CANNOT — do this alone."

He also explained the high stakes of this race.

"The GOP knows if they take New Hampshire, Democrats don’t have a shot at retaking the Senate. And they’re ready to bury us in negative ads and dark money," he further noted. "We’ve got to fight smarter, faster, and harder. We’ve got to help Chris Pappas build the campaign we need to win. Let’s show these Republican bigshots that they can’t buy another Senate seat. Not on our watch."

Carville concluded with, "Let’s win this damn thing and flip control of the Senate."

Senate votes to check Trump's military moves in 'stunning rebuke to White House': report

The Senate has voted 52-47 on Thursday to push forward legislation that would force President Donald Trump to have congressional approval before any further military action in Venezuela.

The move was considered a sharp criticism of the Trump administration and the first major action to push back against the Trump administration following the military capture of President Nicolás Maduro, according to Politico. The measure was backed by several Republicans, including Susan Collins (R-MA), Todd Young (R-IN) and Josh Hawley (R-MO).

The resolution was cosponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) and Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), who have attempted to curb the president's maneuvers in the South American country. Sen. John Fetterman (D-PA) also cast his vote in support of the resolution even after saying he could oppose the move.

The Trump administration has not sought congressional approval for its military actions in Venezuela.

"The vote is a shocking sign of divisions among Republicans on Trump’s plans for the South American country, and an about-face to a November vote on limiting the president that failed. Democrats have promised more tough votes that force Republicans to take a public stance as Trump threatens to seize Greenland and floats military action in Colombia," Politico reported.

GOP rebels push back as core bill tries to 'smuggle' unvetted proposals into law

Republican Party senators are expecting Donald Trump to intervene on a bill used to "smuggle" unvetted changes into law.

The bill has been flagged as a "concern for a number of reasons" by several GOP members, and an unnamed lawmaker within the party believes the president may have to get directly involved. Speaking to The Hill, the GOP lawmaker said part of the problem was satisfying the concerns aired by three Republican senators who are refusing to approve the bill.

The lawmaker said, "I don’t know that we’ll ever be able to satisfy them, that’s the frustrating part. I think the president is going to have to get involved."

Conservative Sens. Mike Lee (R-UT), Ron Johnson (R-WS) and Rick Scott (R-FLL) brought the bill to a standstill over a number of concerns.

Lee explained the problems he had with the bill, sharing, "There are a number of authorizing provisions that were smuggled into the bill, into the [Interior] appropriations bill. It shouldn’t have been. It’s not how it’s supposed to work. We’re not supposed to authorize in an appropriations bill and you’re certainly not to do that without the knowledge and consent of the chairman."

The delay means the package will likely not be passed through this year, but Lee believes delaying the bill is justified because of the overlooked additions found on a closer look.

He said, "There are a number of earmarks in this package and it concerns me for a number of reasons. We’ve still got a conference policy that has been in place since 2011, it’s never been rescinded, that says that it is the policy of our conference that no member shall direct a congressional directed spending item, meaning an earmark."

"That policy was followed quite consistently by our conference for a decade after it was adopted. I have grave concerns that we’re now well into — nearly a year into — the new Republican administration and this is the most substantive [spending package] that we’ve had so far and definitely the most earmarks that I’ve seen."

Sen. Mike Rounds (R-SD), a member of the Appropriations Committee, aired his frustrations with the delayed bill and said it's more about "trying to move to regular order" than anything else.

He said, "The bottom line is members should be able to get amendments because we want an open process but nobody is going to guarantee an outcome to members that have a disagreement on one piece or another. That’s disconcerting to some members, they’d rather have an outcome. This is about trying to move to regular order."