Majorkas Rides Again

 

The open southern border is a complete disaster, costing the US taxpayers billions and endangering us all.

Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene’s resolution to impeach Homeland Security’s Secretary Majorkas for his myriad failures failed Monday due to a vote instead to send it to a committee (in other words, to let it die).

This motion passed only because a handful of Republicans voted with the Democrats, which basically killed the impeachment effort, and 13 other Republicans dodged their responsibility to cast a vote.

Had those 13 voted with the party majority, the resolution would have instead gone to a vote in the full House, and forced a difficult vote for Democrats to cast.

Who the heck are the Cowardly 13?

Published in Immigration
This post was promoted to the Main Feed at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 29 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Was it a roll call vote?

    • #1
  2. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    8 Republicans voted with Democrats to save Mayorkas from being fired. 13 Republicans refused to vote on the resolution.

    Here are the 8 Republicans:

    1. Patrick McHenry – North Carolina
    2. Tom McClintock – California
    3. Virginia Foxx – North Carolina
    4. Darrell Issa – California
    5. Cliff Bentz – Oregon
    6. Ken Buck – Colorado
    7. Mike Turner – Ohio
    8. John Duarte – California

    UPDATE: US House Votes with 8 Republicans Joining Democrats to Shelve Impeachment of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas Who Has Overseen the Purposeful Invasion at the US Border | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

    • #2
  3. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    Django (View Comment):

    8 Republicans voted with Democrats to save Mayorkas from being fired. 13 Republicans refused to vote on the resolution.

    Here are the 8 Republicans:

    1. Patrick McHenry – North Carolina
    2. Tom McClintock – California
    3. Virginia Foxx – North Carolina
    4. Darrell Issa – California
    5. Cliff Bentz – Oregon
    6. Ken Buck – Colorado
    7. Mike Turner – Ohio
    8. John Duarte – California

    UPDATE: US House Votes with 8 Republicans Joining Democrats to Shelve Impeachment of DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas Who Has Overseen the Purposeful Invasion at the US Border | The Gateway Pundit | by Jim Hoft

    Well, good thing McHenry didn’t become “permanent” Speaker.

    • #3
  4. Annefy Coolidge
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    It’s more than obvious that there are those on both sides of the aisle who benefit from an open border 

    • #4
  5. TBA Coolidge
    TBA
    @RobtGilsdorf

    Annefy (View Comment):

    It’s more than obvious that there are those on both sides of the aisle who benefit from an open border

    On another thread I mentioned that manufacturing jobs are done overseas because our laws make manufacturing most things more expensive than the cost of making it elsewhere and shipping it in. 

    Similarly, it is cheaper to leave the door open for ‘undocumented workers’ to do work more cheaply than what we would have to pay citizens to do it. 

    • #5
  6. WI Con Member
    WI Con
    @WICon

    Yet another episode of Failure Theater. What are we as GOP voters supposed to do with this? How do they (Ronna, Johnson, Scalise…Trump, DeSantis, Haley…) expect us to process/react to this?

    I realize giving the Speaker increased power to remove members from committees, cutting of funding to holdouts like this is a double-edged sword (it all depends on who holds the blade), but I’d like to see the caucus be able to start instilling some discipline and consequences to this perfidy.

    Ken Buck should be working out of the janitor’s closet at this point.

    • #6
  7. Annefy Coolidge
    Annefy
    @Annefy

    TBA (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    It’s more than obvious that there are those on both sides of the aisle who benefit from an open border

    On another thread I mentioned that manufacturing jobs are done overseas because our laws make manufacturing most things more expensive than the cost of making it elsewhere and shipping it in.

    Similarly, it is cheaper to leave the door open for ‘undocumented workers’ to do work more cheaply than what we would have to pay citizens to do it.

    The list of those who benefit from an open border is a long one. And it makes for strange bedfellows. 

    • #7
  8. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Annefy (View Comment):

    TBA (View Comment):

    Annefy (View Comment):

    It’s more than obvious that there are those on both sides of the aisle who benefit from an open border

    On another thread I mentioned that manufacturing jobs are done overseas because our laws make manufacturing most things more expensive than the cost of making it elsewhere and shipping it in.

    Similarly, it is cheaper to leave the door open for ‘undocumented workers’ to do work more cheaply than what we would have to pay citizens to do it.

    The list of those who benefit from an open border is a long one. And it makes for strange bedfellows.

    If I put on my tinfoil had for a moment, I’d assume that when the inevitable terrorist attack occurs because of lax border policies, the Demo-rats will use it as a reason to attempt to disarm all citizens. And the useless GOPe cowards will do nothing at all about that.  

    • #8
  9. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Django (View Comment):
    If I put on my tinfoil had for a moment, I’d assume that when the inevitable terrorist attack occurs because of lax border policies, the Demo-rats will use it as a reason to attempt to disarm all citizens.

    Of course they will. Never let a crisis go to waste. 

    • #9
  10. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Fritz:

    Who the heck are the Cowardly-13?

    One of them was apparently at home dealing with his mother’s death, I’ll excuse him (I wondered why there was a link about that at Citizen Free Press, now I know).

    All of the others can get bent (unfortunately, I don’t know who they are, either).

     

    • #10
  11. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):

    Fritz:

    Who the heck are the Cowardly-13?

    One of them was apparently at home dealing with his mother’s death, I’ll excuse him (I wondered why there was a link about that at Citizen Free Press, now I know).

    All of the others can get bent (unfortunately, I don’t know who they are, either).

     

    You do know the eight repubs who voted with the Demo-rats. With a five-seat majority they would have tanked it regardless of what the other 13 repubs did. BTW, I think 12 Demo-rats voted “present” too. 

    • #11
  12. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Django (View Comment):

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):

    Fritz:

    Who the heck are the Cowardly-13?

    One of them was apparently at home dealing with his mother’s death, I’ll excuse him (I wondered why there was a link about that at Citizen Free Press, now I know).

    All of the others can get bent (unfortunately, I don’t know who they are, either).

    You do know the eight repubs who voted with the Demo-rats. With a five-seat majority they would have tanked it regardless of what the other 13 repubs did. BTW, I think 12 Demo-rats voted “present” too.

    @django    Perhaps. IF no other votes had changed other than those of the 12 (excusing the one with the family death) who abstained, the measure would have been defeated, and the resolution would go to the floor for a vote.

    But realistically, had those 12 been voting with the majority of their party, there would probably have been zero departures from the Democrat bloc, so the 8 Republicans would indeed have been able to torpedo the effort to defeat the measure to refer to a committee. So, same diff. Sigh.

    • #12
  13. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    You know, the way the powers that be keep blowing holes in the Ship of State you’d think they have an iron lock on the life rafts. I am guessing they are overconfident. But, just (sigh). Yes, where is the list on the non-votes?

    • #13
  14. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Rodin (View Comment):

    You know, the way the powers that be keep blowing holes in the Ship of State you’d think they have an iron lock on the life rafts. I am guessing they are overconfident. But, just (sigh). Yes, where is the list on the non-votes?

    I tried multiple queries, but the vote did not show up. Seems to list only “roll call votes”. 

    Congressional Votes Database – GovTrack.us

    • #14
  15. Rodin Member
    Rodin
    @Rodin

    Django (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    You know, the way the powers that be keep blowing holes in the Ship of State you’d think they have an iron lock on the life rafts. I am guessing they are overconfident. But, just (sigh). Yes, where is the list on the non-votes?

    I tried multiple queries, but the vote did not show up. Seems to list only “roll call votes”.

    Congressional Votes Database – GovTrack.us

    https://www.c-span.org/congress/votes/?113059/House/118-1/645

    REPUBLICAN

    DEMOCRATIC

     

    • #15
  16. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    You know, the way the powers that be keep blowing holes in the Ship of State you’d think they have an iron lock on the life rafts. I am guessing they are overconfident. But, just (sigh). Yes, where is the list on the non-votes?

    I tried multiple queries, but the vote did not show up. Seems to list only “roll call votes”.

    Congressional Votes Database – GovTrack.us

    https://www.c-span.org/congress/votes/?113059/House/118-1/645

    REPUBLICAN

    DEMOCRATIC

     

    Thank you for providing names.

    I wonder why there are so many abstaining California Democrats, and if there is some venerability there we could exploit?

    • #16
  17. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    Django (View Comment):

    Rodin (View Comment):

    You know, the way the powers that be keep blowing holes in the Ship of State you’d think they have an iron lock on the life rafts. I am guessing they are overconfident. But, just (sigh). Yes, where is the list on the non-votes?

    I tried multiple queries, but the vote did not show up. Seems to list only “roll call votes”.

    Congressional Votes Database – GovTrack.us

    https://www.c-span.org/congress/votes/?113059/House/118-1/645

    REPUBLICAN

    DEMOCRATIC

     

    Thank you for providing names.

    I wonder why there are so many abstaining California Democrats, and if there is some venerability there we could exploit?

    Kabuki. Thirteen GOPe don’t vote. Twelve Democrats don’t vote. Eight GOPe vote against. That eight was all it took to sink the motion. Sounds like a setup where there was an agreement among the Uniparty members to protect those in vulnerable districts. 

    • #17
  18. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    Darrell Issa is a serious conservative, and he voted to send it to committee, so I wondered why. Here is his explanation:

    “We didn’t kill a Mayorkas impeachment,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “We voted to start impeachment hearings the entire country will watch. If we impeach Mayorkas today, Senate Democrats will feel free to reject it today. We want hearings where Democrats are forced go on the record and finally have to defend Biden’s historic border disaster. That’s the last thing they want.”

    I don’t agree with that reasoning because there have already been so many hearings about the border that they should have plenty of material to impeach Mayorkas. And the Senate Dems will never convict him, regardless of how good the evidence is, so there’s no point in putting together a better case. Instead it’s about making the case to the American people that Mayorkas should be removed from office. I think Issa’s reasoning is sincere, but I disagree.

    • #18
  19. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Darrell Issa is a serious conservative, and he voted to send it to committee, so I wondered why. Here is his explanation:

    “We didn’t kill a Mayorkas impeachment,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “We voted to start impeachment hearings the entire country will watch. If we impeach Mayorkas today, Senate Democrats will feel free to reject it today. We want hearings where Democrats are forced go on the record and finally have to defend Biden’s historic border disaster. That’s the last thing they want.”

    I don’t agree with that reasoning because there have already been so many hearings about the border that they should have plenty of material to impeach Mayorkas. And the Senate Dems will never convict him, regardless of how good the evidence is, so there’s no point in putting together a better case. Instead it’s about making the case to the American people that Mayorkas should be removed from office. I think Issa’s reasoning is sincere, but I disagree.

    All one really needs is the side-by-side of Majorkas’s myriad assertions in congressional testimony that the border is “secure,” along-side videos of the massive incursions by illegals, the masses under the bridge, the scaling of or destruction of the wall structure, and the published statistics of encounters and “got aways.”.

    Res ipsa loquitor.

    • #19
  20. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Fritz (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Darrell Issa is a serious conservative, and he voted to send it to committee, so I wondered why. Here is his explanation:

    “We didn’t kill a Mayorkas impeachment,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “We voted to start impeachment hearings the entire country will watch. If we impeach Mayorkas today, Senate Democrats will feel free to reject it today. We want hearings where Democrats are forced go on the record and finally have to defend Biden’s historic border disaster. That’s the last thing they want.”

    I don’t agree with that reasoning because there have already been so many hearings about the border that they should have plenty of material to impeach Mayorkas. And the Senate Dems will never convict him, regardless of how good the evidence is, so there’s no point in putting together a better case. Instead it’s about making the case to the American people that Mayorkas should be removed from office. I think Issa’s reasoning is sincere, but I disagree.

    All one really needs is the side-by-side of Majorkas’s myriad assertions in congressional testimony that the border is “secure,” along-side videos of the massive incursions by illegals, the masses under the bridge, the scaling of or destruction of the wall structure, and the published statistics of encounters and “got aways.”.

    Res ipsa loquitor.

    Give it a try and let us know.  If it works for you maybe the rest of us will be encouraged to do it, too. 

    • #20
  21. Fritz Coolidge
    Fritz
    @Fritz

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Fritz (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Darrell Issa is a serious conservative, and he voted to send it to committee, so I wondered why. Here is his explanation:

    “We didn’t kill a Mayorkas impeachment,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “We voted to start impeachment hearings the entire country will watch. If we impeach Mayorkas today, Senate Democrats will feel free to reject it today. We want hearings where Democrats are forced go on the record and finally have to defend Biden’s historic border disaster. That’s the last thing they want.”

    I don’t agree with that reasoning because there have already been so many hearings about the border that they should have plenty of material to impeach Mayorkas. And the Senate Dems will never convict him, regardless of how good the evidence is, so there’s no point in putting together a better case. Instead it’s about making the case to the American people that Mayorkas should be removed from office. I think Issa’s reasoning is sincere, but I disagree.

    All one really needs is the side-by-side of Majorkas’s myriad assertions in congressional testimony that the border is “secure,” along-side videos of the massive incursions by illegals, the masses under the bridge, the scaling of or destruction of the wall structure, and the published statistics of encounters and “got aways.”.

    Res ipsa loquitor.

    Give it a try and let us know. If it works for you maybe the rest of us will be encouraged to do it, too.

    It is not up to me, as I am not a congress critter. It is up to the elected reps to pursue this matter.  No point in my contacting my Rep, as she is all-in on all the Democrats’ agenda, no questions asked. May you have better representation.

    • #21
  22. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Fritz (View Comment):

    The Reticulator (View Comment):

    Fritz (View Comment):

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    Darrell Issa is a serious conservative, and he voted to send it to committee, so I wondered why. Here is his explanation:

    “We didn’t kill a Mayorkas impeachment,” Issa told Fox News Digital. “We voted to start impeachment hearings the entire country will watch. If we impeach Mayorkas today, Senate Democrats will feel free to reject it today. We want hearings where Democrats are forced go on the record and finally have to defend Biden’s historic border disaster. That’s the last thing they want.”

    I don’t agree with that reasoning because there have already been so many hearings about the border that they should have plenty of material to impeach Mayorkas. And the Senate Dems will never convict him, regardless of how good the evidence is, so there’s no point in putting together a better case. Instead it’s about making the case to the American people that Mayorkas should be removed from office. I think Issa’s reasoning is sincere, but I disagree.

    All one really needs is the side-by-side of Majorkas’s myriad assertions in congressional testimony that the border is “secure,” along-side videos of the massive incursions by illegals, the masses under the bridge, the scaling of or destruction of the wall structure, and the published statistics of encounters and “got aways.”.

    Res ipsa loquitor.

    Give it a try and let us know. If it works for you maybe the rest of us will be encouraged to do it, too.

    It is not up to me, as I am not a congress critter. It is up to the elected reps to pursue this matter. No point in my contacting my Rep, as she is all-in on all the Democrats’ agenda, no questions asked. May you have better representation.

    I wasn’t talking about congress. I was talking about making the case to the American people.  I presume all of us know some American people. 

    • #22
  23. GlennAmurgis Coolidge
    GlennAmurgis
    @GlennAmurgis

    anyone surprised – the permanent bureaucracy never pays the price. 

     

    • #23
  24. Steve Fast Member
    Steve Fast
    @SteveFast

    I decided to expand the research I did on Issa’s reason for opposing impeachment to see what the others had to say for themselves. Here’s a summary of their reasons:

    McHenry, Issa, Foxx, Bentz – Homeland Security should finish its investigation so that impeachment can be done in regular order and have a better chance of Senate conviction.

    Duarte – Impeachment should go through regular order because doing it on the floor of the House wastes valuable time.

    McClintock – Mayorkas has done a terrible job but hasn’t committed a high crime or misdemeanor.

    Buck – I couldn’t find a specific statement from him about this vote, but he has a long-standing feud with Marjorie Taylor-Greene, the sponsor of the impeachment. He previously said that Kevin McCarthy was pushing impeachment against Mayorkas to distract from his own problems (before McCarthy was removed). His Republican colleagues are frustrated with his erratic voting.

    Turner – Couldn’t find anything.

    They had a variety of reasons. If conservatives are going to think for themselves, unlike the Dems voted in lockstep with Nancy, some of them are going to be mistaken in their thinking. Which makes it very frustrating to manage the Republican conference.

    The other thing I noticed is that none of them are engaging in political warfare. They all have some rose-colored view of how the political process works, or should work, akin to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. It’s going to be hard to beat the Dems if several Repubs are not willing to engage in battle.

    • #24
  25. Django Member
    Django
    @Django

    Steve Fast (View Comment):

    I decided to expand the research I did on Issa’s reason for opposing impeachment to see what the others had to say for themselves. Here’s a summary of their reasons:

    McHenry, Issa, Foxx, Bentz – Homeland Security should finish its investigation so that impeachment can be done in regular order and have a better chance of Senate conviction.

    Duarte – Impeachment should go through regular order because doing it on the floor of the House wastes valuable time.

    McClintock – Mayorkas has done a terrible job but hasn’t committed a high crime or misdemeanor.

    Buck – I couldn’t find a specific statement from him about this vote, but he has a long-standing feud with Marjorie Taylor-Greene, the sponsor of the impeachment. He previously said that Kevin McCarthy was pushing impeachment against Mayorkas to distract from his own problems (before McCarthy was removed). His Republican colleagues are frustrated with his erratic voting.

    Turner – Couldn’t find anything.

    They had a variety of reasons. If conservatives are going to think for themselves, unlike the Dems voted in lockstep with Nancy, some of them are going to be mistaken in their thinking. Which makes it very frustrating to manage the Republican conference.

    The other thing I noticed is that none of them are engaging in political warfare. They all have some rose-colored view of how the political process works, or should work, akin to Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. It’s going to be hard to beat the Dems if several Repubs are not willing to engage in battle.

    IMNSHO, there is no chance of a Senate conviction in any case. McHenry, Issa, Foxx, and Bentz are experiencing cranio-rectal inversion . . . or just lying. Thanks for tracking their reasons down.

    • #25
  26. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    The best reason I can think of for keeping people like Majorkas in place, is because they’re Biden-administration-nominated officials, and people should have to suffer appropriately for electing Biden.  If the people Biden wants get removed so the country doesn’t suffer, why not vote for Biden again next time?

    • #26
  27. DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order Oaf 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    kedavis (View Comment):
    The best reason I can think of for keeping people like Majorkas in place, is because they’re Biden-administration-nominated officials, and people should have to suffer appropriately for electing Biden.

    I’m fine with Biden voters suffering. I’m not fine with everyone suffering.

    • #27
  28. kedavis Coolidge
    kedavis
    @kedavis

    DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order O… (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    The best reason I can think of for keeping people like Majorkas in place, is because they’re Biden-administration-nominated officials, and people should have to suffer appropriately for electing Biden.

    I’m fine with Biden voters suffering. I’m not fine with everyone suffering.

    Problem is, if the Biden voters end up not suffering because everyone else doesn’t deserve to suffer too, the Biden voters never learn.

    • #28
  29. DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order Oaf 🚫 Banned
    DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order Oaf
    @DrewInWisconsin

    kedavis (View Comment):

    DrewInWisconsin, Lower Order O… (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    The best reason I can think of for keeping people like Majorkas in place, is because they’re Biden-administration-nominated officials, and people should have to suffer appropriately for electing Biden.

    I’m fine with Biden voters suffering. I’m not fine with everyone suffering.

    Problem is, if the Biden voters end up not suffering because everyone else doesn’t deserve to suffer too, the Biden voters never learn.

    No, I’m talking TARGETED suffering.

    You know, like sending illegals directly to New York.

    Instead of to me.

    • #29
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.