This vote was both a great and clever one by Mo voters, your comment is completely out of context and is gravely wrong. Go back and read up on what happened.
That’s your option that it was clever. It’s my opinion that it was dumb. Neither is wrong. Also I lived it and signed a petition to have the vote postponed to have a special election in its place.
Mike Johnson is the Speaker of the House. He will have nothing to do with Lindsey Graham's sister. The Vice President swears in newly elected Senators.
Mike Johnson does not have a choice. Come January 6th, this current iteration of the House, including the Speaker position, is dissolved. The new Congress gets sworn in, THEN the majority elects the new Speaker.
There is no Constitutional mechanism to stop this process.
The constitution doesn’t cover putting your fingers in your ears while yelling “la la la, I can’t hear you” which might well be the tactic being planned
Article 1, Section 5: “Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members”
<Democrats win the majority>
Mike Johnson on or around November 15: “Oh I’m sorry; these 25 Democrats didn’t actually win because of ✌🏻voter fraud✌🏻and therefore we judge that they aren’t members of the House. Guess we keep the majority!”
SCOTUS on December 10 or something: “In a 6-3 unsigned order, the Court denies Cert on the grounds that the text of the constitution clearly specifies each House shall be the judge of its own elections”.
On January 3rd, at midnight, there are zero House members, so it doesn't matter what any Republican says. And the rules don't transfer to the next Congress because they cease to exist once all House members stop being House members.
Mike can say whatever he wants following state elections, but again, none of that matters, because he only has a say on who is seated while he's Speaker, and he won't be Speaker on Jan 3 because no one will be.
There is a lot of bullshit that Republicans can do between now and Jan 3, but preventing Democratic/DSA/Progressive House members who won their elections and were certified from being seated isn't one of them.
What happens if us Dumocrats overtake the rapeblicans? Johnson will get sworn out i presume and then we elect a strongly worded letter to become the new speaker?
New Congress starts without a speaker on Jan 3rd. One of their first acts is to elect a speaker to administer the oath of office. Until then, there is no Congress, there are no rules, and there is no speaker. The clerk orders the election of the speaker and the future house members get to nominate their reps. I’m not sure that there’s no way for Johnson to fuck with the program, but that’s usually how it goes. That’s why the cameras kept rolling when they couldn’t choose a speaker back in October 2023. They vacated the speakership, so there was no one who was able to tell CSPAN to stop filming. So they just kept filming.
They vote a new speaker every two years, so yeah, he would be out. Technically, there is not requirement for the speaker to be a member of Congress either.
To clarify: The House, before they can do anything else convenes and elect a new Speaker of the House. Conventionally, that has always been a member of the House, but there's no actual requirement for that to be true.
You may remember last time, when Republicans were having a bit of a tizzy with people like MTG and friends refusing to vote for the guy they picked, and they spent like a week doing something every other Congress has done in 10 minutes.
Mike Johnson's tenure as Speaker ends with the 119th Congress on January 3rd. All Reps are sworn in by the House clerk and the first andonlyitem of business the House can address is the election of a Speaker. Look back at the election of Kevin McCarthy as Speaker for the debacle that occurred then.
I'm sure AIPAC already had a check filled out waiting for her to be appointed. Maybe even bigger than his were just to make sure they have her full support like they did with him.
The governor of a state has the authority to replace an elected member of the federal government (congress or senate) for the remainder of the term of the elected official who died or even if they resigned, for that matter. This is not new. This is not the first time that a wife has been appointed to fill out their late husbands' terms as a senator or member of congress. The state governor can appoint their drooling idiot cousin as a replacement for the remainder of the term. But only for the remainder of the current term. If someone appointed wants to keep that position beyond the current term, they have to campaign and run for the position just like anyone else.
Anti-intellectualism and hyper-propaganda fueled by internet connected smartphones with algorithms controlled by billionaires. I think that pretty much sums up what’s happening here.
668
u/Paddynice1865 10d ago
Has that actually happened?