Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe Atlantic: Pelosi and McConnell Are Playing High-Stakes Poker
Last edited Tue Jan 7, 2020, 05:22 PM - Edit history (1)
https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/01/house-senate-impeachment-standoff/604531/
Benjamin Wittes and Quinta Jurecec
<snip>
Its time for some game theory.
The standoff stems from McConnells proposal for how to proceed with the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump: Pelosi has accused McConnell of violating his oath of office, while Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has suggested a trial procedure that would guarantee that at least four witnesses are called to testify. McConnell has balked at agreeing in advance to call witnesses. Instead, he has argued, the Senate should begin the proceedings without such an agreement and address the question of witnesses only after the House has made its opening argument against the president and Trumps team has responded.
For this reason, the articles of impeachment remain stalled between the House and the Senate, with Pelosi refusing to deliver them to the other side of the Capitol until McConnell reaches some kind of accommodation with Schumer. Theres no reason, the Democratic leadership argues, to provide the articles to the Senate only for them to be quickly quashed. So Pelosi has withheld the articles until, as she puts it, McConnell agrees to proceed in a manner worthy of the Constitution.
Who will blink first?
This sort of strategic tangle is quite different from the debates that led up to the presidents impeachment, which were charged with a kind of moral and legal urgency. The questions then presented a challenge of immediate importance: What sort of behavior by a president so steps outside the bounds of what Americans should consider acceptable that the House should act to remove him from office? To this question, there was a clear right answer, and the House acted to establish its view that Trump had breached his oath of office.
</snip>
Benjamin Wittes and Quinta Jurecec
<snip>
Its time for some game theory.
The standoff stems from McConnells proposal for how to proceed with the impeachment trial of President Donald Trump: Pelosi has accused McConnell of violating his oath of office, while Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has suggested a trial procedure that would guarantee that at least four witnesses are called to testify. McConnell has balked at agreeing in advance to call witnesses. Instead, he has argued, the Senate should begin the proceedings without such an agreement and address the question of witnesses only after the House has made its opening argument against the president and Trumps team has responded.
For this reason, the articles of impeachment remain stalled between the House and the Senate, with Pelosi refusing to deliver them to the other side of the Capitol until McConnell reaches some kind of accommodation with Schumer. Theres no reason, the Democratic leadership argues, to provide the articles to the Senate only for them to be quickly quashed. So Pelosi has withheld the articles until, as she puts it, McConnell agrees to proceed in a manner worthy of the Constitution.
Who will blink first?
This sort of strategic tangle is quite different from the debates that led up to the presidents impeachment, which were charged with a kind of moral and legal urgency. The questions then presented a challenge of immediate importance: What sort of behavior by a president so steps outside the bounds of what Americans should consider acceptable that the House should act to remove him from office? To this question, there was a clear right answer, and the House acted to establish its view that Trump had breached his oath of office.
</snip>
The Speaker has the upper hand.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
5 replies, 808 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (2)
ReplyReply to this post
5 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Atlantic: Pelosi and McConnell Are Playing High-Stakes Poker (Original Post)
Dennis Donovan
Jan 2020
OP
House should subpoena Bolton & withhold the articles until he testifies, then amend the existing art
Dennis Donovan
Jan 2020
#5
triron
(22,020 posts)1. Embarrassing that even 'The Atlantic' has to go with the both-sidism BS.
This is all on mcConnell. Nancy is playing fair.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)2. As on Guardian Report stated,
the MSM of the USA has no clue how to report about what the Orange Anus and his Pal Moscow Mitch are doing.
Dennis Donovan
(18,770 posts)3. Read the article. It says Nancy's got the upper hand in all of this
Phoenix61
(17,018 posts)4. My money is McConnell blinks first.
His ego is all wrapped up in this. Pelosi is doing what she believes the constitution requires he to do. Ill bet on calm, cool logic any day of the week.
Dennis Donovan
(18,770 posts)5. House should subpoena Bolton & withhold the articles until he testifies, then amend the existing art
Link to tweet
"House should now subpoena Bolton & withhold the articles until he testifies - they can decide whether to amend them"