I looked it up and I think this might help explain. The term “sanction” itself is pretty non-specific.
The House may discipline its Members without the necessity of Senate concurrence. The most common forms of discipline in the House are now “expulsion,” “censure,” or “reprimand,” although the House may also discipline its Members in other ways, including fine or monetary restitution, loss of seniority, and suspension or loss of certain privileges. In addition to such sanctions imposed by the full House of Representatives, the standing committee in the House which deals with ethics and official conduct matters, the House Committee on Ethics—formerly called the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct—is authorized by House Rules to issue a formal “Letter of Reproval” for misconduct which does not rise to the level of consideration or sanction by the entire House of Representatives. Additionally, the Committee on Ethics has also expressed its disapproval of certain conduct in informal letters and communications to Members.
So it could be something as minor as a letter of reprimand to fines, revocation of seniority or committee assignments, or even expulsion at the most extreme.
As far as expulsion goes…
When the most severe sanction of expulsion has been employed in the House, the underlying conduct deemed to have merited removal from office has historically involved either disloyalty to the United States, or the violation of a criminal law involving the abuse of one’s official position, such as bribery. The House of Representatives has actually expelled only five Members in its history, but a number of Members, facing likely congressional discipline for misconduct, have resigned from Congress or have been defeated in an election prior to any formal House action.
That could potentially apply here given the seriousness and context of these allegations.
In this case particularly, because Republicans will be able to shut down the investigation by the House Ethics Committee on January 3rd. Consider who was referred, and then assess the chances that any ethics investigation will go forward in the House.
I don’t expect any of this to have value beyond the political ramifications. The DOJ is gonna do what it’s gonna do, and the House will be under Republican leadership before anyone can even decide what they think an appropriate sanction might be for particular people.
Though… Who knows. Maybe the Republicans can use it as excuse to handle a few problematic people on their own side.
I also think that the political ramifications are important in themselves. It’s theater, but it may be impactful theater.
I think it is more than that. The J6 committee’s purpose was to drive and show political support so the DOJ could pursue the criminal case. As Congress represents the political will of the People, with this referral the official political will of the People is to prosecute these guys.
Because of this, I don’t expect this to actually go anywhere with the Ethics stuff. I do hope that the Democrats already have people on staff whose job it is to take note of, and make scathing references to, every member of the House who votes to let them off. “House Republicans refused to disciple the Members of Congress who aided an insurrection against the United States!” needs to be plastered on billboards across the US for the next ten years. At least.
And don’t forget that the Senate can pick up where the House committee left off. DOJ may or may not ignore the actions of the 4 referred (McCarthy, Biggs, Jordan and Perry), but the Senate has some power to at least continue to reveal the treachery of these people in a committee of their own.
I suppose that’s what I meant, though it’s a bit potato, po-tah-to. Pressure/support is somewhat two sides of the same coin. “We publicly support you, now just fucking do it guys.”
I’d rather not have political pressure, either, and it does cut both ways. But there’s pressure not to indict Trump, so I can’t really blame others for bringing pressure to indict him.
I’m surprised at how few people grasp how important the January 6th Committee was to educating the public about the investigation/prosecutions that are solely within the purview of the DOJ. DOJ learned from the Mueller investigation how important it is to keep the public apprised of the facts – but they can’t provide that function. The Committee could.
The Committee’s job was to bring the public along to understand why a former president will be indicted. They did their job. It’s gratifying to see how many people now are impatient for the DOJ to get on with their prosecutions.
Similarly, people seem to think all the testimony offered at the January 6th proceedings is admissible in a court of law. It’s not. Think Cassidy Hutchison’s testimony about Trump’s actions in the vehicle is admissible? It’s not. Every word of that was hearsay.
I’m not worried about DOJ bringing indictments. They will, and when they do, their cases will be rock solid. I’m more confident than ever that Mark Meadows and Dan Scavino have flipped. DOJ has 2 grand juries presently convened and active: One for January 6th matters, the other for Mar-a-Lago documents. No reason to go through all that if the decision is to decline to bring charges.
My only question is whether they’re going to give Trump and others one last holiday with the family. (I hope not, but probably.)
Really. As far as political pressure and the insurrection go, it begins with political pressure not to indict a former Pres.
The political pressure to put a man above the law is the start of it. Holding people accountable is simply the application of the law in pursuit of justice.
Which Republicans feel is political, because their guy breaks the law a lot.
Well, that may be the reason that some people give for not indicting Trump, but I wouldn’t necessarily take their word that that’s their true motivation. If Hillary Clinton had won in 2016, would the chants of “lock her up” have continued, or would Republicans throw up their hands and say “can’t indict her now that she’s president”?
Of course not. Just because Republicans are motivated by political bullshit doesn’t remove politics from their motivation.
(ETA: Once you start adding truth and reality to the situation, you’re gonna find that Republicans and logic and consequences and the whole ballgame just go fucking haywire.)
