Fetterman backs a vote to expel Menendez from Senate

[brooklynite]

Source: NBC News

WASHINGTON — Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., on Thursday became the first senator to say he supports a vote to expel embattled Sen. Bob Menendez, D-N.J., from the Senate over the federal bribery charges that have rocked Capitol Hill.

Fetterman’s remarks came moments after Menendez defended himself during a closed-door lunch with his fellow Senate Democrats, then defiantly told reporters he would not resign and would "continue to cast votes on behalf of the people of New Jersey" despite mounting calls from his party to step down. Menendez pleaded not guilty to the charges Wednesday.

Fetterman did not attend Menendez's address to colleagues and members of the Ethics Committee, which could open a probe into Menendez, were asked to leave.

“Now that it’s confirmed that he’s not going to go the honorable way, you know, I would like to pursue whatever avenues that are available. ... Whatever way, you know, we can remove him, I hope that that’s pursued,” Fetterman said when asked about the possibility of expulsion.

Read more: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/fetterman-backs-vote-expel-menendez-senate-rcna117920

[LiberalFighter]

1. Would it pass?

Manchin and Sinema likely oppose it along with most if not all Republicans.

[Grins]

2. It might be interesting to see how R's vote. But..

…beyond that, what does it mean?

Does ’expel’ mean he is no longer a Senator and NJ Gov can appoint a replacement?
Or does it mean he can’t be in the building?

Because if it is not the first, they are hanging an even bigger club to Manchin and Sinema.

[melm00se]

3. The Constitution in Article I, section 5 says

"Each House [of Congress] may determine the Rules of its proceedings, punish its members for disorderly behavior, and, with the concurrence of two-thirds, expel a member."

Expulsion is the process by which a house of Congress may remove one of its members, after the member has been duly elected and seated.

Expulsion is uncommon, the last time it happened was around the Civil War.

List

At that point, the NJ Governor can appoint a replacement.

[malthaussen]

4. Isn't that assuming he's guilty?

Okay, okay, I am not an infant. Mr Menendez is a New Jersey senator, of course he's corrupt. But I'm not really comfortable with the idea that someone is considered guilty before he has his day in court, or what are our courts for?

It's alleged that even the false claim that Hillary Clinton was being "investigated" weakened her support, even though we all know she never did nuthin'. If people are expelled or shunned just because they're being "investigated," or even if they have been indicted, it takes the whole Caesar's Wife thing to absurd extremes, IMO.

One might ask what, then, I think about Donald Trump's indictments not stopping him from running for President. I will stick to my principles. Indictment should not disqualify him from candidacy, and until it is proven in a court of law that he raised insurrection against the United States, the 14th Amendment should not apply (but should after he is). To do otherwise is to substitute the rule of rumor and reputation for the rule of law. One shouldn't just drop principles when they become inconvenient. The counter-argument is that his case is "different," and it is not without merit. Especially as the idiot has as much as openly admitted guilt numerous times on record. Fortunately or un, it is not up to me to decide.

-- Mal