• usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    23 hours ago

    Chuck Schumer had that power last wee

    And the senate would not need to be involved here. All but 1 house dems did vote against it when there was a real chance to stop it (it wasn’t 100% certain that republicans had the vors in the house)

    House dems are livid at Schumer. The house has been better at opposing - it’s just that their powers are much more limited while in the minority are more limited compared to the senate.

    Democrats have no subpoena power or ability to hold official hearings while in the minority

    The context was in flipping the house. They would be in the majority in that scenario

    If you for half a second think a Republican-led House

    Again the context was flipping the house

    • Catma@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      23 hours ago

      Ok and assumming they flip the house what are they going to do? They can do all the hearings and pass out a metric fuckton of subpoenas, what makes you think anyone in this administration listens or shows up? I am pretty sure they did that the first time around, and people shook their fingers and sent very mean letters to no avail.

      Whose to say Ttump then doesnt just dismiss congress? Whose gonna fucking stop him?

      • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        23 hours ago

        If they don’t testify, they can put people in contempt of congress which can be enforced by the Sergeant at Arms. This is something that did happen to Steve Bannon when he refuesed to testify for the Jan 6th committee. Not just a hypothetical power

        The Sergeant at Arms is part of the house, not the executive

        If Trump tries to illegally dismissing congress, they could just still meet and direct the Sergeant at Arms anyway