• @Carrolade
    link
    English
    587 days ago

    In order to advance the measure, the Speaker of the House would have to allow it. He is an ally of the two. Then, once advanced, the House would have to vote to impeach, and the House is currently controlled by the gop, and they too are unlikely to impeach their allies.

    So the chances of it getting anywhere are near-zero, for this year anyway. Next year could potentially be different.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      57 days ago

      Kinda makes it sound like these judges are members of the party and can’t be objective and therefore can’t be judges then.

    • @kinsnik
      link
      267 days ago

      honestly, even if the house is turned in november and they vote to impeach them, the next step is trial at the senate. it requires 2/3 of the votes, so they won’t get convicted and removed

      • @Carrolade
        link
        English
        227 days ago

        Yeah, fair point. A Senate trial would still be useful to publicly air all of the evidence though.

    • El Barto
      link
      97 days ago

      Thanks. I wonder why AOC is doing this now instead of waiting until after the elections when the House may (may) flip.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        317 days ago

        So that everyone running for a House seat can get their position on record before the election, I suppose

      • @Carrolade
        link
        English
        197 days ago

        Politics. It’s important that we keep this in the news cycle, so people remember why its important to work together to try to get these people thrown out. It also forces the gop to block the measures, which could potentially make them look like they are condoning corruption. Which they are.

        Symbolism basically.