David Cicilline led the fight against Big Tech. Here’s what comes next.

The House is losing its top antitrust reform champion later this year when Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) resigns. 

The congressman announced last month that he will retire from Congress in June to take a role as president and CEO of the Rhode Island Foundation, a community foundation and largest funder of nonprofit organizations in the state, ending his seven-term run in the House.

By reaching across the aisle, Cicilline led the House Judiciary Committee, as chair of the antitrust subcommittee, in advancing a series of bipartisan proposals to revamp antitrust laws in a way that targeted the nation’s largest tech companies.

Cicilline and his coalition of antitrust reform supporters said the rules on the books fail to address the modern day industry giants, namely Meta, Amazon, Google and Apple.

The proposals sought to address concerns critics said the tech platforms raised, such as boosting their own products and services over rival offerings, and to redefine what firms qualify as dominant companies based on market cap and user base numbers.

But his efforts were often met with opposition.

The companies have pushed back strongly on that assertion, with tech groups arguing that the proposals would force them to unwind services and features users enjoyed.

Cicilline and the bills' supporters said the bills would not have the effect, but failed to pass any of them. Despite the rare bipartisan support, most of the proposals failed to make it to President Biden’s desk in the last Congress. 

Lobbying during a House transition

The combination of hefty lobbying from tech giants and a flip in House control to GOP leaders means the antitrust proposals are seemingly at a standstill.

While a handful of congressional Republicans support taking antitrust action against Big Tech companies, GOP lawmakers as whole have focused their tech agenda on content moderation and censorship.

In an interview with The Hill, Cicilline said he is still hopeful there is still a path forward for the agenda he laid the groundwork for in the House. 

“There's still really strong bipartisan support for that whole package. We had the votes in the last Congress. My sense is we have the votes in this Congress, too. I think what will make it a little more challenging for the next couple of years is the Republican House leadership's opposition to these bills,” Cicilline told The Hill. 

In another blow to the antitrust reform push, House GOP leaders replaced Cicilline’s Republican counterpart in the fight, Rep. Ken Buck (Colo.), in the top spot on the House Judiciary antitrust subcommittee.

When they took control this year, Republicans placed Rep. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.), a staunch libertarian, as subcommittee chair in yet another sign that they won’t take up the bills.

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.)
Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) gives remarks during an enrollment ceremony for The Respect for Marriage Act at the Capitol in Washington, D.C., on Thursday, December 8, 2022.

How Cicilline joined the antitrust fight

Cicilline was hesitant at first to take the reins as ranking member of the antitrust subcommittee in 2017. Rich Luchette, a longtime former senior adviser to Cicilline, said he even advised his boss against doing so. 

“I was thinking to myself, 'He's in leadership, he's gonna have his hands full with that, he should pick one lane. And what is antitrust anyways?' ” he said, referring to lawmaker's role as co-chair of the Democratic Policy and Communications Committee. 

“Fortunately, he did not listen to me,” Luchette added. 

For Cicilline, his reluctance was rooted in the fact that he had little experience with antitrust law. But upon advice from Rep. Jerry Nadler (D-N.Y.), the ranking member of the Judiciary Committee, he took the post. 

“He said, ‘Sometimes you should take a new assignment just because you're going to stretch your mind and learn something new,'" Cicilline said.

"And it turned out to be very good advice, because shortly after taking this role, the big Cambridge Analytica breach was revealed, and a lot of information about what was happening online and the focus really became the role of these technology platforms in not only our economy, but in our democracy,” he continued.

While Democrats were still in the minority, Cicilline started by learning more about the issues.

His tutorial on the issues turned into launching the investigation that led to the blockbuster 450-page report on digital marketplace competition — a process that included grilling the CEOs of the nation’s largest companies at committee hearing.

“The more I've learned about it over these years, the more urgent I believe action is. The more damaging, I think, allowing these technology companies that have monopoly power to continue to operate unchecked from any regulation and continue to grow their power and their market share is,” Cicilline said. 

How Cicilline built an antitrust reform coalition 

Although House GOP leaders aren’t showing interest in bringing the bills forward again, the Judiciary Committee’s markup in June 2021 brought together unlikely allies in the House. 

The proposals advanced out of the committee with support — and opposition — from both sides of the aisle, placing lawmakers like Reps. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) and Matt Gaetz (R-Fla.) on the same side promoting the bills and Reps. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) and Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.) together on the opposing side

Buck said that bipartisan nature was a key part of how he led the push. 

“I think that we need more of David Cicillines in Congress — people who have strong feelings about their issues, but who are also willing to work across the aisle,” Buck told The Hill. 

Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.)
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) addresses reporters following the weekly policy luncheon on Tuesday, January 24, 2023.

Buck was a leading Republican voice advocating for the antitrust reform bills. Along with him, Democrats found unlikely allies in Gaetz and Rep. Lance Gooden (Texas) among the handful of Republicans supportive of the effort.

In the Senate, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and other supporters found a GOP ally in Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa).

Luchette said that bipartisan work was a cornerstone of how Cicilline approached his work in the House. 

“I could go on probably for hours telling you about the times that I worked for him and saw him working with people who are seen as right-wing ideologues, people who are on Fox News all the time, people who give no quarter to the Democratic Party, and he would work effectively with them on issues,” Luchette said. 

“At the end of the day, that's the way the system should work. It's not supposed to work with people just going to their corners and holding the line. You're supposed to be able to find common grounds and to the extent that they were able to do that, I think that was in large part because of the energy and effort that he poured into it,” Luchette added. 

The bills were the result of a 16-month investigation into market dominance in the digital sector, which ultimately led to a series of bipartisan proposals aimed at reforming antitrust laws to tackle concerns critics say are posed by Amazon, Meta, Google and Apple.

Pushback to proposals was immediate and substantial

Because tech giants have denied using anticompetitive practices, the companies and the industry groups that back them pushed back strongly on the proposals, shoveling millions into lobbying and expensive opposition ad campaigns. 

Much of that opposition was largely from groups like Chamber of Progress, NetChoice, and the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which represent companies including Amazon, Google, Meta and Apple.

CCIA’s “Don’t Break What Works” campaign launched a series of ads targeting the proposals and arguing they would force companies to unwind services users enjoy or make companies charge users for previously free features. 

California Democrats, especially those who represent tech-heavy Bay Area districts, also pushed back on the proposals, arguing that they didn’t address the problems identified by the House investigation into digital marketplace competition in an effective way to serve the public.

Republicans fought hard against more antitrust regulation

Critical House Republicans, like Jordan, opposed the plans on the basis that the bills would give the Biden administration “more money.” 

To get Buck on board, Cicilline held a field hearing on competition issues in Buck’s home state of Colorado in 2020. 

The hearing featured executives from Tile, Sonos, Basecamp and the Boulder-based company PopSockets that testified over how tech giants were impacting their companies. 

“I wanted to demonstrate to him, even though he was the ranking member, that I respected his role in this work, and I also wanted him to hear from Colorado business folks about the impact of these platforms, on their businesses, business people, and, we just developed a very strong working relationship,” Cicilline said. 

Buck said after the hearing he became more interested and involved, and was able to develop a “trusting relationship” with Cicilline. 

“Which during this time frame is difficult. Obviously, David and I disagreed about the impeachment votes, and we disagreed about a lot of other very contentious issues,” Buck said. 

Cicilline served as an impeachment manager for former President Trump’s second impeachment. Buck voted along with the majority of his party against both impeachments of Trump. 

“But when it came to this, we both found common ground. And he was great if I went to my Republican colleagues and discussed a bill and they said, ‘Well, you know, you got to change this and one, two, and three,’ " he said.

"I would go to David and get those things changed and I would go back and get Republican support. So it really was a process where he was willing to compromise a great deal to get the Republican support that we needed to get the bills passed in the House,” Buck said. 

Cicilline said both lawmakers understood that the tech companies were trying to “desperately make this a partisan issue” and pit the two against each other. 

“And we resisted that at every turn despite their best efforts,” Cicilline said.

Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.)
Rep. Ken Buck (R-Colo.) is seen following the sixth ballot for Speaker on the second day of the 118th session of Congress on Wednesday, January 4, 2023.

What supporters accomplished — and hope to do next

Two of the more high profile proposals, the American Innovation and Choice Online Act and the Open App Markets Act, didn’t get floor votes in the House or Senate and failed to be added to end of the year omnibus bills despite a push from the bill’s sponsors and outside supporters. 

The first bill aimed to limit dominant platforms from creating preferences for their own products and services on their platforms.

The second aimed to add regulations for dominant app stores. In the Senate, versions of the bills also advanced out of the Judiciary Committee with bipartisan support. 

Lawmakers did, however, successfully get a package of less controversial antitrust reform measures, also part of the proposals spawned from the House investigation, passed.

The package aimed to boost federal and state antitrust enforcers’ power to give them a better shot at taking on powerful tech firms.

“I think for sure when the Democrats take the House back, this will remain a priority and I expect these laws will also make it to the president’s desk,” Cicilline said, of the other antitrust proposals. 

Can Cicilline's legacy evolve into policy?

Democrats controlled the House, Senate and White House before the 2022 election, but the proposals failed to get floor votes in either chamber. 

“It can often take multiple terms of Congress to build sufficient support to pass legislation. So we look forward to continuing to monitor in the Congress and hope to see concrete changes that come about to check Big Tech’s power,” said Morgan Harper, director of policy and advocacy at the American Economic Liberties Project, a nonprofit that supports antitrust and corporate accountability legislation. 

As Cicilline steps down, it is not clear who will take the reins from him when he leaves.

He said Democrats who were sponsors of the proposals that came forward, like Jayapal, Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) and current House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) are the “likely champions” of the antitrust push in the next Congress. 

Harper said the Rhode Island Democrats’ legacy is going to include “educating a generation of Congressional leaders to both understand the dangers of Big Tech and importantly the antitrust tools that Congress has to do something about it.”

“We really see Congressman Cicilline as a once-in-a-generation leader on antitrust, and in many ways the person Congress was waiting for to move this issue forward,” she said.

As Congress grapples with threats from new emerging technologies, such as the rapid rise of ChatGPT and the wave of rival generative AI products, Cicilline said it is “absolutely essential” that Congress “remain and get current on this technology.” 

“I think one of the things that was a tremendous advantage at the big companies was that Congress, sort of let them do what they want to set back and allowed them to continue to grow and be free from any government oversight or regulation,” he said. 

“I hope that was a lesson and that everyone will recognize that those around to make the jurisdiction need to really stay current with these developments, so that we won't be a decade behind the decision that needs to be enacted,” he added.

Democratic Rep. Cicilline to leave Congress in June

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) will leave Congress in June to take over as the president and CEO of the Rhode Island Foundation, his office announced on Tuesday.

“Serving the people of Rhode Island’s First Congressional District has been the honor of my lifetime,” Cicilline, 61, said in a statement. “As President and CEO of one of the largest and oldest community foundations in the nation, I look forward to expanding on the work I have led for nearly thirty years in helping to improve the lives of all Rhode Islanders.”

Cicilline, who has represented Rhode Island’s 1st Congressional District since 2011, will officially step down June 1. Cicilline’s staff will continue to operate the district’s Rhode Island and Washington, D.C., offices until a new representative is chosen in a special election, his office said.

“The chance to lead the Rhode Island Foundation was unexpected, but it is an extraordinary opportunity to have an even more direct and meaningful impact on the lives of residents of our state,” he added.

Cicilline easily sailed to reelection in his solidly blue Rhode Island district in November’s midterm elections, securing about 64 percent of the vote.

His decision to leave Congress comes after longtime Rhode Island Rep. James Langevin (D) stepped down from the state’s only other congressional seat last year, after more than 20 years in office. He was replaced by Rep. Seth Magaziner (D) in the state’s first open congressional race since 2010.

A special election for Cicilline’s seat cannot be scheduled until he officially resigns from office, according to The Boston Globe.

Cicilline rose to even greater prominence as one of the Democrats' impeachment managers for former President Trump's second impeachment trial.

Prior to joining Congress, Cicilline spent over a decade in Rhode Island politics, getting his start in the Rhode Island General Assembly in 1995. In 2003, he was elected mayor of Providence, becoming was the first openly gay mayor of a state capital city.

Cicilline is currently one of only 13 openly gay, lesbian and bisexual members of Congress, according to the Pew Research Center, and is a co-chair of the Congressional Equality Caucus.

In November, Cicilline briefly made a move for House Democratic leadership, launching a last-minute bid for the assistant leader position against veteran Rep. James Clyburn (D-S.C.). However, Cicilline ultimately stepped aside.

Updated at 10:39 a.m.

Democrats Introduce Legislation to Bar Trump From Ever Holding Public Office

Representative David Cicilline, backed by 40 other House Democrats, introduced legislation citing a Civil War-era provision in the 14th Amendment to bar Donald Trump from ever holding public office.

Cicilline put forth HR 9578 which seeks to deem Trump “ineligible to again hold the office of President of the United States or to hold any office, civil or military, under the United States.”

Forty Democrat co-sponsors have signed on to the bill. Oddly enough, only one original member of the Squad – Rep. Ayanna Pressley (D-MA) is a co-sponsor.

“Donald Trump very clearly engaged in an insurrection on January 6, 2021 with the intention of overturning the lawful and fair results of the 2020 election,” Cicilline said in a statement without evidence. “You don’t get to lead a government you tried to destroy.”

RELATED: Democrat Seeking to Use 14th Amendment to Bar Trump From Office

Democrats Want to Bar Trump From Holding Office by Comparing Him to Confederates

Cicilline sent out a letter to colleagues just a few weeks ago, outlining a bill and requesting co-sponsors for the measure that “would prevent Donald Trump from holding public office again under the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Surprised to see he didn’t track down outgoing Republican lawmakers Adam Kinzinger and Liz Cheney to join the effort.

What he did do, however, was utilize another useful GOP idiot for the Democrats – Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

Cicilline used the Republican senator’s own words to suggest Trump was responsible for a small portion of his supporters – that he urged to protest ‘peacefully‘ – getting out of control, and thus fomenting an insurrection.

“Even Mitch McConnell admits that Trump bears responsibility,” Cicilline said, “saying on the Senate floor that ‘[t]here’s no question, none, that President Trump is practically and morally responsible for provoking the events of the day.'”

RELATED: Democrats Have A Back-Up Plan That Might Still Bar Trump From Running Again If Impeachment Fails

They Are Desperate

No question he is responsible, eh?

But there is a question as to how Trump’s speech equates to being liable for the actions of others. 

Trump was not even at the site of the riot and as such, could not be charged for actions engaged in at the Capitol.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is a rarely cited Civil War-era provision that bars individuals from holding office if they “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or “given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

In other words, mostly high-ranking Confederates.

Trump was impeached in January 2021 on the charge of “incitement of insurrection,” but was ultimately acquitted by the Senate.

Acquitted. End of discussion. This thing would be laughed out of the courts in record time.

Not to mention the dangerous precedent such legislation would open the floodgates to. After all, Democrats themselves have objected to electoral proceedings in numerous past elections:

  • 15 Democrats objected to counting Florida’s electoral votes in 2000.
  • 31 Democrats voted in favor of rejecting electoral votes from Ohio in 2004.
  • 7 different Democrats objected 11 times to certifying the results of the 2016 presidential election.

With all of that, Democrats would have to schedule a vote on Cicilline’s bill before the legislative calendar comes to a close next week. With a GOP-controlled House set to take over in January, the 14th Amendment gambit seems likely to die.

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Democrats Introduce Legislation to Bar Trump From Ever Holding Public Office appeared first on The Political Insider.

Report: Democrat Seeking to Use 14th Amendment to Bar Trump From Office

Representative David Cicilline is seeking to invoke an obscure section of the 14th Amendment to bar Donald Trump from ever holding office again.

Cicilline, a Rhode Island Democrat, is specifically citing the former President’s alleged involvement in “inciting an insurrection.”

He sent a letter to colleagues outlining a bill and requesting co-sponsors for the measure that “would prevent Donald Trump from holding public office again under the Fourteenth Amendment.”

Cicilline circulated his letter on the same night Trump announced his campaign for the presidency.

RELATED: Democrats Attempting To Use 14th Amendment To Bar Trump From Office

Using the 14th Amendment to Bar Trump

Is there an Amendment the Democrats haven’t used in trying to keep Donald Trump out of the White House? If it’s not the 25th Amendment, let’s try the 14th.

Section 3 of the 14th Amendment is a rarely cited Civil War-era provision that bars individuals from holding office if they “have engaged in insurrection or rebellion” or “given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

Cicilline believes the January 6 Committee has provided proof of said rebellion on the part of the former President.

He says his bill “details testimony and evidence demonstrating how Donald Trump engaged in insurrection against the United States,” and references evidence provided by the select committee hearings.

RELATED: Democrats Have A Back-Up Plan That Might Still Bar Trump From Running Again If Impeachment Fails

Flawed Logic

David Cicilline’s bid to bar Trump from office using the 14th Amendment has a couple of fatal flaws.

One, just because the media refers to a rally that got out of control as ‘insurrection’ does not make it so, especially when referencing a Civil War-era clause that was clearly referencing those who took up arms to try and fracture the United States.

Two, while Trump was impeached in January 2021 on the charge of “incitement of insurrection,” he was ultimately acquitted by the Senate.

Acquitted. End of discussion.

It’s such a sad attempt at keeping Trump out of office that one almost feels pity for Cicilline.

It’s not a unique stance, however.

The Political Insider reported back in February of 2021 that Congressional Democrats were considering utilizing the 14th Amendment to stop their primary political opponent.

The measure at the time had no support on either side of the political aisle, with Democrats preferring “to see the former president convicted in the impeachment trial.”

He wasn’t convicted, making use of the Amendment even more ludicrous.

Legal scholar Jonathan Turley has argued that invoking the measure against Trump is a “dangerous” tactic for the nation.

Barring the former President from running again in the future based on a rarely cited provision of the 14th Amendment, after having been acquitted and without a supermajority vote, could open up the floodgates for parties in power to keep their political opponents out of office.

  • 15 Democrats objected to counting Florida’s electoral votes in 2000.
  • 31 Democrats voted in favor of rejecting electoral votes from Ohio in 2004.
  • 7 different Democrats objected 11 times to certifying the results of the 2016 presidential election.

All of those Democrat lawmakers tried to overturn a legal presidential election. In 2016, it led to violent riots in the streets of Washington, D.C. meant to intimidate officials. In other words, an ‘insurrection’ by the media’s phony standards.

Should those individuals also be barred from ever running for office again under the 14th Amendment?

Now is the time to support and share the sources you trust.
The Political Insider ranks #3 on Feedspot’s “100 Best Political Blogs and Websites.”

The post Report: Democrat Seeking to Use 14th Amendment to Bar Trump From Office appeared first on The Political Insider.

House Democrat eyes legislation to bar Trump from office under 14th Amendment

Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.) is eyeing legislation that would bar former President Trump from serving in office under the 14th Amendment “for leading an insurrection against the United States.”

Cicilline, who served as an impeachment manager during Trump’s first impeachment, sent a letter to his Democratic colleagues Tuesday night previewing a bill to prevent Trump from holding office and soliciting co-sponsors for the measure.

It is unclear when the congressman plans to introduce the bill. The listed deadline for lawmakers to co-sponsor the measure is Thursday at noon.

The Rhode Island Democrat circulated the letter the same night Trump announced his 2024 campaign for president.

“Given the proof – demonstrated through the January 6th Committee Hearings, the 2021 impeachment trial, and other reporting – that Donald Trump engaged in insurrection on January 6th with the intention of overturning the lawful 2020 election results, I have drafted legislation that would prevent Donald Trump from holding public office again under the Fourteenth Amendment,” Cicilline wrote.

Trump was impeached for a second time in January 2021 on the charge of “incitement of insurrection” following the Capitol riot, but the Senate ultimately acquitted him. The House impeached him for a first time in December 2019 for “abuse of power” and “obstruction of Congress” over revelations regarding his dealings with Ukraine, though the Senate acquitted him of both charges.

Cicilline argued that Trump should be barred from holding office under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, known as the “Disqualification Clause,” which says individuals should not be allowed “to hold any office” if they “engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.”

The congressman said his bill “details testimony and evidence demonstrating how Donald Trump engaged in insurrection against the United States,” pointing to revelations from Jan. 6 select committee hearings.

“It specifically details how Donald Trump engaged in insurrection when he helped to plan and encouraged the insurgence on January 6th despite knowing that the election results were lawful; attempted to intimidate state and federal officials when they did not support his false claims and unlawful plans; tried to manipulate Mike Pence into unlawfully refusing to certify the election results, despite Mr. Pence’s and legal advisors’ assertion that he held no such authority; and supported the violent insurrection at the Capitol on January 6th, refusing for hours to denounce or act against the mob and putting thousands of lives in danger,” the letter reads.

If he introduces the bill, Cicilline will have to lay out the process for how the measure would use Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. According to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), the text is vague.

“It is unclear whether Section 3 is self-executing, which, if it is not, would leave federal and state courts or election authorities without power to determine the eligibility of candidates unless Congress enacts legislation to permit it. Courts have produced mixed results on this question,” the CRS report reads.

“Section 3 does not expressly provide a procedure for its implementation other than Section 5’s general authority of Congress ‘to enforce [the Fourteenth Amendment’ by appropriate legislation,’” it adds.

Trump announced his intention for a third presidential bid Tuesday night at his Mar-a-Lago resort, telling the audience at the event "we always have known that this was not the end. It was only the beginning of our fight to rescue the American dream."

"In order to make America great and glorious again, I am tonight announcing my candidacy for president of the United States," he added.

Democrat Rep. David Cicilline Pulls Down Mask To Sneeze Into His Hand

On Wednesday, you could clearly see Democrat Congressman David Cicilline of Rhode Island pull down his mask to sneeze into his hand.

This happened on the House floor during the debate over impeaching President Donald Trump for allegedly inciting the crowd that attacked the Capitol last week.

RELATED: Biden Plans To ‘Immediately’ Introduce Immigration Legislation, Authorize Criminal Investigation Of Family Separations

Democrat Congressman Cicilline Ignores COVID Safety

Cicilline is one of the impeachment managers appointed by Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

Sitting behind Democratic Congresswoman Yvette Clark, who was advocating to impeach Trump, you could clearly see Cicilline pull down his mask and sneezed into his hand.

After he sneezes, the congressman pulls his mask back up.

Democrats Demand Fines For Not Wearing Masks

More than a few Democrats have called for fines for members of Congress who do not wear a mask while on the floor.

Democratic Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal recently announced she had COVID-19, blamed it on GOP members, and declared that there should be “serious fines” for any member who refuse to wear one.

Jayapal said, “Additionally, any Member who refuses to wear a mask should be immediately removed from the floor by the Sergeant at Arms. This is not a joke.”

“Our lives and our livelihoods are at risk, and anyone who refuses to wear a mask should be fully held accountable for endangering our lives because of their selfish idiocy,” Jayapal claimed.

RELATED: ABC Quietly Edits Story That Claims Republican Movement Should Be ‘Cleansed’ Of Trump Supporters

Wear A Mask Or Pay A Fine

The Hill reported Tuesday, “House Democrats on Tuesday will adopt new rules slapping fines on any lawmakers who refuse to wear masks on the chamber floor.”

“The new guidelines will hit offending lawmakers with a $500 fine on the first offense and $2,500 on the second, to be deducted from the lawmakers’ pay, according to a senior Democratic aide,” The Hill noted.

Republican Congressman Thomas Massie responded by asking if the fines were constitutional.

“How does this not violate the 27th amendment which states: “No law, varying the compensation for the services of the Senators and Representatives, shall take effect, until an election of Representatives shall have intervened.” 

Legal or not, don’t expect any penalties for Democratic Congressman David Cicilline. 

The post Democrat Rep. David Cicilline Pulls Down Mask To Sneeze Into His Hand appeared first on The Political Insider.

House To Vote On Impeachment On Wednesday As Pelosi Drums Up Votes Against Trump

The House of Representatives is set to vote on Wednesday on whether or not to impeach Donald Trump just seven days before Joe Biden is scheduled to be inaugurated.

House Preparing To Vote On Impeachment 

Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) reportedly informed members of Congress in a private call on Monday that they will need to come back to the Capitol on Tuesday night, according to Politico. If Trump refuses to resign and Vice President Mike Pence does not invoke the 25th Amendment, impeachment is scheduled for consideration at 9 a.m. Wednesday.

On Monday, key members of the House Judiciary Committee introduced a single article of impeachment, and it has already gathered at least 218 cosponsors. This comes days after supporters of President Trump stormed the Capitol building in protest over the election results.

“Because the timeframe is so short and the need is so immediate and an emergency, we will also proceed on a parallel path in terms of impeachment,” Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) told reporters on Monday. “Whether impeachment can pass the United States Senate is not the issue.”

Once the House has voted, the articles of impeachment are expected to move immediately to the Senate. Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) has suggested that a trial there likely won’t start until the upper chamber returns on January 19.

However, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer is trying to reconvene the chamber under emergency powers that were given to Senate leaders in 2004, as a way to move immediately to an impeachment trial.

Related: James Clyburn Admits House Democrats May Not Send Articles Of Impeachment To Senate Until After Biden’s First 100 Days In Office

Democrats Speak Out

Democrats have been rallying behind the idea of sending the articles of impeachment immediately.

“I think we should pass it and the Senate should take it up immediately,” said Rep. David Cicilline (D-R.I.), a lead author of the impeachment resolution. “This is urgent. This president represents a real danger to our democracy.”

Biden said on Monday that he has talked to members of both chambers about a potential plan to “bifurcate” the Senate proceedings.

“We need to take very seriously what happened … Hours and days matter,” sad Rep. Chrissy Houlahan (D-PA). “I wish we could just hold our breath” for 10 days. “But I don’t think we should or can afford to. I think we’ve seen that our nation and our homeland is in danger.”

Related: GOP Sen. Ben Sasse Will Consider Impeachment, Ilhan Omar Predicts President Trump WILL Be Removed

“I’ve heard a lot of people say, Is it the right thing politically to impeach this president? … Will it harm the Democratic Party?” added Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI). “In terms of whether it could harm the Democratic Party, I could not care less.”

In a letter sent out to Democrats on Sunday night laying out the next steps of impeachment, Pelosi wrote, “In protecting our Constitution and our Democracy, we will act with urgency, because this President represents an imminent threat to both.”

This piece was written by James Samson on January 11, 2021. It originally appeared in LifeZette and is used by permission.

Read more at LifeZette:
The Possibility Of A Patriot Party
Giuliani Calls For Trump To Declassify Everything – Says He Owes It To MAGA Movement
Jon Voight Defies Hollywood To Praise Trump After Capitol Riots – ‘It’s Not Over’

The post House To Vote On Impeachment On Wednesday As Pelosi Drums Up Votes Against Trump appeared first on The Political Insider.