President Donald Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy got into a screaming match Wednesday

[brooklynite]

(Punchbowl News email):

Punchbowl behind the scenes: President Donald Trump and House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy got into a screaming match Wednesday as an enraged mob of Trump supporters attacked the Capitol, according to a source familiar with the episode.

McCarthy, one of the president's closest allies in Congress, demanded that Trump release a statement denouncing the mob. Initially, Trump would not agree to do it.

As protestors were smashing their way into the Capitol in an unprecedented act of political violence, Trump -- also under pressure from top aides to act -- finally relented and said he would send a tweet. That wasn't good enough for McCarthy, who wanted more. Trump later issued a tepid video statement that criticized the protestors while still insisting he won the election. On Thursday night, Trump issued another video, finally conceding he would be out of office soon, but he never mentioned Joe Biden by name.

The heated exchange between Trump and McCarthy was one of the sharpest between the two men. It shows how badly Wednesday's deadly attack on the Capitol has damaged Trump's relationship with GOP leaders on the Hill. The Republican leadership has put up with a lot. Most recently, they went along with Trump’s quixotic challenge to the presidential election.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is "basically done with him,” said a source close to McConnell. Senate Republicans voted overwhelmingly to certify Biden’s Electoral College win in the aftermath of Wednesday’s Capitol riot.

Punch Bowl is a new political news organization formed by former editors from Politico.

[Miguelito Loveless]

1. Saw this elsewhere

This narrative is being floated by McCarthy to give himself political cover. He voted to overturn the election AFTER the insurrection began, so he is subject to expulsion.

[Borchkins]

5. This!

He doesn't get to rehabilitate himself after going on to vote to overturn.

[brooklynite]

8. No, he is NOT subject to expulsion...

This is one of the silliest concepts I've heard lately.

Removal of a House member requires a 2/3 vote of the Chamber; that means 1/3 of the votes would need to come from Republicans.

As for grounds; he has a statutory right to vote on certification of Electoral Votes.

[Miguelito Loveless]

10. He has helped instigate the insurrection and spread the voter fraud lies

Also, being subject to expulsion, and having the votes to expel, are two separate issues. He IS subject to expulsion.There is hard evidence from his own lips that he believed Trump was working for the Russians, and yet he has backed Trump is his efforts to subvert the vote.

"...shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof."

Failure to punish insurrectionists and their supporters in government guarantees the next coup will succeed.

[brooklynite]

11. He is subject to expulsion the way every House member is...

...and knows, absent criminal conviction, that it won't happen.

[Miguelito Loveless]

14. You said he was NOT subject to expulsion

He is. Whether it happens or not is a separate issue. And again, if we refuse to vote on expulsion, perfectly justified by the Constitution, and inserted SPECIFICALLY because of the last time they pulled this shit, then we are pretty much telling these people, "Keep trying until you succeed, no penalty for trying".

Voting on articles of expulsion forces the Republican Party to go on the record supporting the country, or insurrection.

I have no idea why people want to drag their feet on this when the violations of the law are clear and unambiguous.

[brooklynite]

15. He's not, practically speaking, subject to expulsion for anything that he's done...

You're free to disagree, but that's an issue you should take up with Speaker Pelosi, who won't be kicking out any House members over this.

[Miguelito Loveless]

18. Words either matter or they don't

You stated categorically he was NOT SUBJECT to expulsion. Now it's "practically speaking". He either is, or isn't.

The Democratic leadership's failure to punish the lawmakers who openly, willfully, and proudly supported insurrection, (who stated they believed Trump to be working for the Russians in McCarthy's case) is to encourage them to keep trying. Even now, they are moving into overdrive to re-write the narrative to discredit attempts to punish them under the explicit law written specifically to punish people like them.

"Pragmatism" is what has brought us to this point. The GOP has no allegiance to pragmatism, or the rule of law. Obama, Pelosi, et al, decided to give Bush a pass on war crimes, and dozens of other violations of the law, and here we are.

[brooklynite]

20. As I said, every member is subject to explulsion.

You suggested that McCarthy had leaked the story of challenging Trump to protect himself from expulsion. My point is that McCarthy knows that he won't be expelled, so there's no point in protecting his flank.

[Miguelito Loveless]

22. Your subject line: "No, he is NOT subject to expulsion..."

Again, McCarthy is on record, with this own words:

“There’s two people I think Putin pays: Rohrabacher and Trump.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-russia-report-idUSKCN18D2YO

Despite this statement, that he believed the president of the United States was in the pay of an avowed enemy of the United States, he supported Trump, normailzed his lawless actions, and helped perpetuate and advocate his lies about election fraud, providing encouragement for insurrection. He then backed up those lies by voting to de-certify electoral votes based on those lies.

People have been tried, convicted and executed on less evidence, so I think expulsion is a pretty minor punishment.

[brooklynite]

23. I deal with realism, not legalisms.

Nancy Pelosi is equally subject to expulsion; should we analysis all of her actions in that regard?

[Miguelito Loveless]

24. I don't understand why you cannot simply say

"You are correct, I should have said "practically speaking", and we would not be having this argument. Pelosi is "subject to expulsion", but only when she meets the condition of violating Section 3, which she has NOT done. McCarthy HAS violated Section 3.

The issue of whether the GOP and the Democrats will vote expel is a completely separate issue. Articles of Expulsion are being considered:

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/rep-cori-bush-calls-for-expulsion-of-house-republicans-who-sought-to-overturn-election/article_a1c64227-e0c7-559f-8368-d1101a55af81.html

[Laurelin]

2. Since when

Does saying he loves the rioters constitute criticism?

[Ace Rothstein]

3. I'm so fucking tired of these stories about Republicans calling Trump out in private.

Then fellating him in public.

[wcast]

4. Too little too late.

As Jeremiah Wright preached, their chickens have come home to roost. They were perfectly happy to stand with Trump through the Georgia election. Now that his power grab is over Republicans are willing to let someone leak that they are done with him. Bunch of cowards. Stand up for the constitution only when it is politically expedient.

[58Sunliner]

6. Who cares? "The Republican leadership has put up with a lot"? Revisionist.

They are the problem.

[LiberalFighter]

9. Yet he voted YEA to both objections.

[Hotler]

12. "The Republican leadership has put up with a lot."

He made you swallow every time, didn't he?

[Happy Hoosier]

13. They could end this NOW by impeaching him and removing him.

But they won't.

[gratuitous]

17. Good point

Why haven't any Republican Representatives co-sponsored articles of impeachment? "Oh, the attempt to overthrow the government by force didn't succeed. Isn't that punishment enough?"

[struggle4progress]

16. "I usually just hide in a closet and whisper, 'Fuck this shit!' into a paper bag,

but on Wednesday I disagreed with him out loud, and then he shouted at me! It was frightening"

[msfiddlestix]

19. Hmm.. I read this with quite a bit of skepticism

I don't buy that one of Trump's enabling Lieutenant henchmen and sycophants had this "screaming match" with his dear leader.

He's clearly floating this story out in order to provide cover for his political career.

My opinion based on all that has laid bare in the public for the past five years.

[DFW]

21. Call it a lovers' spat

Obviously McCarthy didn't appreciate not being informed that a violent and unruly mob would storm the Capitol and meet with little to no resistance while a joint session of Congress was going on.

Beyond that, his disagreements with Trump's authoritarian rule and Fantasyland views on reality are negligible, and I'm sure they will have few harsh words for each other from here forward, unless Trump chooses to carry a grudge. That would be foolish, considering how few friends he has left in high places. On the other hand, he is probably deranged enough to do just that, so I give it an even chance that any such shouting match will have lasting consequences for the otherwise cordial relations between the two of them.

If, however, any of the bugs planted by Comrade "needed a Russian interpreter" are found inside of McCarthy's desk or office, and made public, all bets are off.