Conscience not her fealty to trump. 60 out of that number. One vote was present. We have manu raju on capitol hill. An historic vote. There was a lot of talk. The feel of it was as you were reporting earlier that cheney might lose. She went behind the scenes for several weeks in the aftermath of the vote to impeach donald trump, talking to members trying to get them on their side explaining her vote. It appears to have paid off. She was listening to the concerns and did not back away from her vote. In fact today she said she does not regret voting to impeach donald trump. She made that clear to her conference but there were an outspoken contingent of members who came after her very aggressively through the course of this more than fourhour closed door meeting. At the end of the day the members decided it is more important to unite at this moment than engage themselves in a divisive leadership fight and the ouster of the highest ranking republican woman in leadership. Now, at the same t
There are significant Republican House members that are very angry Marjorie Taylorgreene is part of their party and is going to still represent constituents under the republican banner for sometime to come. Lets not forget we are only talking about the house tonight. There is a whole flock of Senate Republicans that are have come out and very strongly denounced her role, said she should be removed from committees and so far as to say she should not be part of the Republican Party. This is a divide that maybe tonight theyre showing somewhat of a unified force. But this is a lingering problem that is going to continue to exist as republicans try and forge their way through this process. A lot of it comes down to winning elections, right . It tends to be that you can win an election as a primary candidate when you run close to president donald trump. We are now starting to see a consistent pattern outside of those strong Republican House districts that are drawn in a way that have more Re
simultaneous joy and despair. it will be hard to bridge the gap, but we must try. we re about to be tested. soon we ll learn can our democracy recently strained in the aftermath of our most recent presidential election with stand the new pressures to come? can controversial laws be enforced in a country as diverse as our s? not without reconciliation. those who are grieving need to recognize the sincerity of neighbors with deeply held beliefs who dreamed of seeing this day. and the many who are celebratory would be well served to recognize the heart break and devastation of citizens who feel they ve had their personal freedom violated. opinions on both sides probably have little to do with justice alito s argument in 213 page opinion. i doubt many have actually read it. i m not being critical. it s a slog even for lawyers. but it s not the work of mullahs. the supreme court is obligated to follow the constitution and precedent. the court of public opinion is guided by an indi
maybe ten minutes before we went on into the committee where he said what he said about me. and i ll tell you again, if you take a little bit of truth and mix with it a big lie, does that make it true? no, it makes it a lie. and that s what he said. he told a lie. so if you re asking me if i want this guy, no. i don t want him. i don t want him. but i guess the missing piece is, mr. speaker, that if someone were brow beaten and leaned on to do something illegal and believes they were being asked to do something illegal, you would hear rusty bowers say, under no circumstances could i ever vote for donald trump. oh, no, no. i m not hearing that. no. it s not this is not a blanket even partial endorsement of donald trump. this is a plea for civility across the country. let s wake up. let s get past this era. let s go in a new direction where we can honestly and civilly be in the public square
all went down? i felt sorry for merrick garland yesterday. he reminded me of good people who step forward and are willing to serve as school board members and then are brow beaten or worse by parents who show up at meetings and are uncivil. that s exactly the way those senators reacted yesterday to merrick garland and as you well point out, the memo about which theoretically they were cross-examining him made no such reference. i watched senator blackburn by way of example say this memo was over the top, really? the memo expressly says while spirited debate about policy matters is protected under our constitution, the protection does not extend to threats of violence. who wouldn t want an attorney general of the united states underscoring that exact point? look, this was a sizzle reel for several of those participants yesterday for 2024 should donald trump not run for president. it was pure theater.