Why the House let out early is a matter of debate after Johnson says chamber has 'done its work'
It’s a matter of debate as to why House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., sent the House home a day early this week. This is in addition to the House lopping off two additional weeks from its schedule later this month and into early October.
"We're going to modify the House schedule by a day. And let me explain to you why. The House has done its work," Johnson said as House members fled Capitol Hill early Wednesday night. "House Republicans are going now back to our districts. We're going to make the case to the American people on what we have delivered on their behalf."
The House isn’t scheduled to reconvene until Nov. 9, just after the midterms.
But outgoing Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky., believes there’s a different reason Johnson cut everyone loose early. The Kentucky Republican introduced eight articles of impeachment for Pentagon chief Pete Hegseth. Because Massie’s push for impeachment is "privileged," the House had 48 hours max to consider the articles.
"I figured out why we canceled tomorrow," Massie said. "Tomorrow would be the vote on impeaching Secretary of Defense Peter Bryan Hegseth. And it looks like that vote's not going to happen."
A senior House Republican leadership source insisted to Fox last week that members would be on Capitol Hill "for a full week."
But, by Wednesday, the House had synced up with the Senate and passed the Russia sanctions bill. It OK'd legislation to protect consumers from high electricity and water bills associated with data centers, foisting the cost on tech companies. Yes, there were calls by bipartisan lawmakers that the House should remain in session to address intensifying concerns about AI. But the House was running out of floor traffic.
Except for Massie’s measure to impeach Hegseth.
REPORTER'S NOTEBOOK: HOUSE CONTROL COULD HINGE ON WHETHER THE OLD POLITICAL RULES STILL APPLY
Now you can determine for yourself why Johnson dismissed lawmakers a day early — to say nothing of the plan for the House to cut town two weeks sooner than originally planned.
But you can imagine what Massie thought.
"Exactly what I predicted," Massie said on the House floor. "Why did he just cut another day off the calendar?"
I found Massie off the floor after he concluded his speech.
"Do you think they adjourned the House because you have the votes on Hegseth?" yours truly asked.
"Chad, they cut two weeks off of the calendar to keep me from getting to 218 votes on the Epstein discharge petition. And then we came into this week, and I introduced eight articles of impeachment against Peter Hegseth, and they have 48 hours to vote on that," Massie replied.
"He cut off the day tomorrow to avoid the vote."
Here are the parliamentary mechanics.
The House was compelled to consider Massie’s impeachment articles if it met this past Thursday. Otherwise, the resolution covering the eight impeachment articles would expire. The 48-hour window associated with such privileged resolutions disappears. Sure. Massie could bring them up when the House next meets in November. But that is seven weeks from now.
But let’s say the House met on Thursday and was forced to bring up Massie’s impeachment articles. Republicans would likely have offered "a motion to table." This is an effort to kill Massie’s gambit. Thus, the vote would not have been on impeaching Hegseth, but whether or not to set aside Massie’s plan.
If the House voted to table Massie’s articles of impeachment, the gig is up. It’s done. The House never even considered the actual impeachment resolutions. The vote was one step removed from a straight, up/down vote on actually impeaching Hegseth.
But let’s say the motion to table was to fail? That means the House immediately skips to the articles of impeachment. The possibility suddenly exists that Hegseth could face eight impeachment votes even through there’s been no investigation. No committee hearings. No "process."
Nowhere does it say in the Constitution that Congress is required to wrestle with the usual parliamentary volutions to impeach someone. If a simple majority in the House votes to impeach you, you’re impeached.
Nuff said.
REPORTER’S NOTEBOOK: CONGRESS MEETS AI AS FEARS OF HUMAN EXTINCTION JOLT CAPITOL HILL
This is why Republicans likely would have moved to table Massie’s impeachment articles. A vote to table inoculates members from having to take a challenging vote on the underlying issue. Keep in mind that there are a number of House Republicans who are aggravated with Hegseth and beside themselves about the war in Iran. This vote would have put them in an interesting position, especially since many if not all Democrats may have voted to impeach.
So, I asked Massie the following about the motion to table.
"That would have put (members) in a tough spot. Or, if they had to vote on that, would it have passed?" I asked.
"A vote on a motion to table? He may not have survived that vote," Massie declared.
In other words, Massie believes the House could have defeated the motion to table. That would have triggered votes on actually impeaching Hegseth. And, from Massie’s standpoint, that’s why Johnson sent the House home.
You might remember that there was a bipartisan effort last summer by Massie and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., to go around Johnson and deposit a measure on the floor, forcing release of the Epstein files. Johnson let the House out early for summer break then. Later, Johnson kept the House out of session for most of the 43-day government shutdown as the special effort to bring action on the resolution loomed.
The House voted to reopen the government in mid-November. And one of the first things the House did after that? Voted 427-1 to require a release of the files. The lone nay vote against releasing the files? Rep. Clay Higgins, R-La.
Even though there aren’t votes until early November, Massie is still a member of the House. He’ll be a member in the lame duck session through early January. Massie lost his primary to Republican Ed Gallrein, a candidate backed by President Donald Trump.
And Hegseth took the unusual step of traveling to northern Kentucky this spring to campaign for Gallrein.
It’s unclear if the Hegseth articles of impeachment will return late this fall or winter. But Massie is back. At least for a little while. And whether Johnson adjourned the House to prevent a vote on the impeachment articles will remain a matter of debate.