On January 12, The Daily Wire reported that the first indictment had been handed out in the bribery case involving Uranium One. That indictment was of Mark Lambert, a 54 year old resident of Maryland who worked in a high position for a transportation company that was responsible for transporting nuclear materials.
That article can be found here:
Within days, there began talk of the mysterious "Memo" composed by House Intelligent Committee Chairman David Nunes, detailing the findings of the House investigation of the FISA warrant that led to the spying of candidate Trump and other members of government.
Immediately, the members on Capitol Hill developed a way to shift the media's attention onto a government shutdown that could put our military and government workers out of work. Congressional Democrats had hoped to leverage their bargaining power on the federal budget with demands of Republican concessions on issues of immigration.
But the shutdown was short-lived, and by Monday, Senate Democrats had hastily conceded their goals.
But why?
Was it because of public outrage? In a time when outrage seems to be the playbook, is it feasible to conclude that enough Democrat constituents suddenly demanded their representatives accept a conservative position? Or that, even if such a scenario did occur, the representatives would even notice or listen? Or, even more implausible, should we trust that conservative voices were loud enough to cause non-conservative representatives to give pause? Or was it something different, altogether?
According to Article I, Section VI of the Constitution, members of Congress are immune to prosecution while in session:
Screen Shot 2018-01-26 at 7.02.21 AM
This screenshot was taken from www.senate.gov
Was it the contents of the memo that caused Congress to quickly reopen operations? If so, this may signal the end of government shutdowns for a while.