General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Laurence Tribe : the Senate can't require the House, to "immediately" whatever is [View all]FBaggins
(26,735 posts)It's Tribe's point that Senate rules require "immediately", but that those rules would be unconstitutional to the extent that they purport to require something of the House. I'm saying that he would be correct if that's the Senate rule... but in saying that it isn't their rule, you're correcting him, not me.
And I've never said the House can tell the Senate what to do.
I agree. You've recognized that the Senate can change their rules and that it's those rules that control.
You're arguing in circles and seem to just be trying to be contrarian.
Not really. It's just that moot court is one of my favorite pastimes and some of these arguments are coming into my wheelhouse. As I said... Pelosi hasn't said this (and I don't expect her to actually try)... and Tribe is really just playing the game to help us gain some advantage... but there are DUers thinking that this is a way out of the bind that we've been in since the impeachment process started. They think there's a way to keep the Senate from acquiting.
The only way for that to happen is for something new to blow up that convinces 20 Republicans to vote for removal. I don't think that Pelosi expects that to happen... and is (correctly) taking the path she thinks will make them pay at the ballot box. I don't think that she would try to actually say "if you won't play by rules, I'll take my ball and go home". It isn't her ball anymore.