Where is the vote to oust Menendez?
- Thread starter DANC
- Start date
Is there a point to this? I followed your link expecting to find evidence that Schumer is avoiding trying to get rid of Menedez? Instead I find a general article detailing the alleged offenses vs Menedez, and this statement...
"Menendez has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has refused to resign from the Senate, despite numerous calls for him to do so, even from fellow Democrats."
Now in case you're unaware Menendez is from NJ, not New York like Santos. New Jersey has different rules in place to replace a Senator who resigns or is ousted...
Gov. Murphy would pick a successor
"If Menendez did choose to resign, Murphy would choose his successor to serve through the end of his term, Jan. 3, 2025.""I would bet that it's not going to be a man," said Murray. "The fact that we haven't had a woman senator in New Jersey ever ... I think knowing Phil Murphy that would be one thing that he would like to correct for the record."
Could Menendez resign amid corruption indictment? How would his Senate seat get filled?
Menendez refused to step down after a prior indictment in 2015. He is up for re-election in 2024.
www.northjersey.com
No idea why you'd think Sen Dems are reluctant to get rid of Menendez, but I'll just chalk it up to your non-existant political instincts. If Dems could get Menendez to resign, then Murphy could hand pick a successor. That would give the chosen replacement incumbency status and a leg up for the 2024 election when Menendez is up for re-election...So if anybody is adverse to Menendez leaving it's likely the GOP.
There is no benefit to Senate Dems to keep Menendez in the Senate, but his indictment was subsequent to the indictments brought vs Santos. My guess is the Dem leadership would prefer Menendez resign and avoid a messy primary fight, but there probably won't be a satisfactory length of time for that to occur after the Senate returns from Xmas break and primary season swings into full gear...
When Menendez was indicted/tried the fist time it was largely Dems who wanted him removed. When the trial resulted in a hung jury and the DOJ declined to retry, it was Donald Trump who expressed support and empathy on a prank call where Trump assumed he was actually talking to the real Menendez...
So I ask again- What's your point?
You made my point for me. Democrats will keep a sleazebag liar and a traitor in office for political gain.Is there a point to this? I followed your link expecting to find evidence that Schumer is avoiding trying to get rid of Menedez? Instead I find a general article detailing the alleged offenses vs Menedez, and this statement...
"Menendez has vehemently denied any wrongdoing and has refused to resign from the Senate, despite numerous calls for him to do so, even from fellow Democrats."
Now in case you're unaware Menendez is from NJ, not New York like Santos. New Jersey has different rules in place to replace a Senator who resigns or is ousted...
Gov. Murphy would pick a successor
"If Menendez did choose to resign, Murphy would choose his successor to serve through the end of his term, Jan. 3, 2025."
"I would bet that it's not going to be a man," said Murray. "The fact that we haven't had a woman senator in New Jersey ever ... I think knowing Phil Murphy that would be one thing that he would like to correct for the record."
Could Menendez resign amid corruption indictment? How would his Senate seat get filled?
Menendez refused to step down after a prior indictment in 2015. He is up for re-election in 2024.www.northjersey.com
No idea why you'd think Sen Dems are reluctant to get rid of Menendez, but I'll just chalk it up to your non-existant political instincts. If Dems could get Menendez to resign, then Murphy could hand pick a successor. That would give the chosen replacement incumbency status and a leg up for the 2024 election when Menendez is up for re-election...So if anybody is adverse to Menendez leaving it's likely the GOP.
There is no benefit to Senate Dems to keep Menendez in the Senate, but his indictment was subsequent to the indictments brought vs Santos. My guess is the Dem leadership would prefer Menendez resign and avoid a messy primary fight, but there probably won't be a satisfactory length of time for that to occur after the Senate returns from Xmas break and primary season swings into full gear...
When Menendez was indicted/tried the fist time it was largely Dems who wanted him removed. When the trial resulted in a hung jury and the DOJ declined to retry, it was Donald Trump who expressed support and empathy on a prank call where Trump assumed he was actually talking to the real Menendez...
So I ask again- What's your point?
No hypocrisy. Republicans got rid of their liar. Democrats keep theirs in office for political gain.
Teddy Kennedy set the precedent.
Your lack of reading comprehension wins outs again. The GOP stalled for months before public pressure after the Ethics Report release forced their hand.
How long has it been since Menendez was indicted? We both agree he should be kicked out of the Senate immediately, but has there been a Senate ethics investigation launched yet?
Do better.
Why would you want to terminate an individual who was awarded the "Strong swimmer against the current" award".
Funny thing is Tom Cotton says they would be sleazy to remove Menendez:
In fact you can read several Republican Senators say they won't help expel him here:
Why Senate Republicans are in no helping mood to expel Bob Menendez
Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman wants so badly to boot fellow Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez from the chamber that he says Republicans should help.
www.washingtontimes.com
It will be hard to get to 67 votes with no Republicans. Fetterman I think can put the resolution up and force everyone's hand, and he has my support in doing so. Alas that doesn't count as one of the 67.
You continue to demonstrate a lack of reading comprehension. It's Pubs who benefit from keeping Menendez around, not Dems. If Menendez were out of office tomorrow Murphy could appoint a replacement and have them in place before Christmas break.
There is no special election mandated in NJ, which is the opposite of the situation in New York. Hoechel can only call a special election to replace Santos, but if Menendez is ousted then by law Murphy gets to name his successor.
So if a Pub was Governor of NJ and likely to replace Menedndez with a Pub, then your ridiculously ignorant claims could have possible merit. But I assure you Schumer would like nothing more than for Menendez to resign...
Take your L and move on. You're making a laughing stock out of yourself with your phoney attempt at equivalency and ridiculous double standard.
I'm betting DANC actually thinks the reason Cotton opposes removing Menendez is because he cares about ethical propriety and presumed innocense. Of course Danc believes in the Easter Bunny as well...Funny thing is Tom Cotton says they would be sleazy to remove Menendez:
In fact you can read several Republican Senators say they won't help expel him here:
Why Senate Republicans are in no helping mood to expel Bob Menendez
Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman wants so badly to boot fellow Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez from the chamber that he says Republicans should help.
It will be hard to get to 67 votes with no Republicans. Fetterman I think can put the resolution up and force everyone's hand, and he has my support in doing so. Alas that doesn't count as one of the 67.
My guess is he's doing the best he can. Reading comprehension is far from his forte, and he just doesn't get it.
Hopefully he'll take the L and slink away. I enjoy refuting DANC with facts. But there are so many other issues he's ridiculously uninformed about so there's a veritable feast to choose from. This one is so sad because he's demonstrating reading comprehension levels lower than a 3rd grader...
Don’t kid yourself, there’d be no Democrat support for expelling Menendez if the Governor was a Republican.
You're almost certainly right, but that won't detract from the deliciousness of Danc's backpedaling when the vote finally happens and the GOP vote to keep him.
You're compelling him to rely on large samples of facts. That's a stretch. It goes against his fake outrage.
Chucky Schumer hasn't even started a Senate investigation.
Running out the clock is a Democrat specialty.
They didn't 'stall'. They held an investigation - something the Senate has yet to do to Menendez.
And Menendez is charged with a felony - not nearly as serious as what Soros did. Hell, if we're going to kick out people for lying about their personal life, Biden would have been out long ago.
That's before Soros was kicked out. Now that people can be kicked out just on accusations, Menendez should be gone.Funny thing is Tom Cotton says they would be sleazy to remove Menendez:
In fact you can read several Republican Senators say they won't help expel him here:
Why Senate Republicans are in no helping mood to expel Bob Menendez
Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman wants so badly to boot fellow Democratic Sen. Robert Menendez from the chamber that he says Republicans should help.
It will be hard to get to 67 votes with no Republicans. Fetterman I think can put the resolution up and force everyone's hand, and he has my support in doing so. Alas that doesn't count as one of the 67.
Next time you post a fact will be the first time. You are so confused, you can't tell the difference between an opinion and fact.
Like the fact the gold Menendez had was found to be stolen?
Get your head out of the sports section sometime.
And most of what Santos is accused of was before he took office unlike what Menendez is accused of. Major difference.
Cracks me up - all the dupes here say they're all for Menendez being expelled, but then make excuses for why he's not.
Chucky could hold a vote tomorrow to expel him. lmao Fat chance that will ever happen.
What's a sports section?
Santos was indicted in May.
Menendez was first indicted in September.
You're bad at this.
So it's been 3 months and still no Senate investigation has started.
You're not even in the game.
You mean the one that started after his indictments were unsealed?
Otherwise you're talking about ethics committees, which Menendez was admonished by in April. It turns out legal due process still matters among people who don't blast fringe right talking points on IU basketball message boards.
You're allowed to research this stuff before you go off half cocked.
Maybe they have more information than you, and are willing to let the legal process play out first. You're acting like the GOP was proactive.
It's odd that your outrage isn't part of their consideration.
So I guess you were lying when you posted this: "You mean the one that started after his indictments were unsealed?"
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt - you're probably just ignorant.
The House had their own investigation and voted Soros out. Your fellow Democrats are propping up a felon.
The House investigation didn't start until Santos' indictments were unsealed.
PS - not a Democrat. Being left of you isn't Left. It's center.
