I actually had a date wrong, it was December 10, and also a little substance error. I found another article that said the final arguments were fast tracked to December 10 to decide on Kupperman’s subpoena. If they were dropping that subpoena, it stands to reason they think they’ll be wrapped up on their investigation before December 10 (not sure if the final arguments could result in a bench decision that day, but there would certainly be appeals that would probably go well into January).
I think the latest they’ll vote is just prior to the Christmas recess, and I saw some stuff that makes it seem like that’s what they’re going for. I think it’s insane to wait that late, but that’s just me. McConnell claimed that he expects a 6 day a week 6 week trial in the Senate, and that would mean that a trial (at the latest) would be wrapped up right around the first primary if they vote before Christmas. I don’t really have an opinion about whether they’ll start a trial before the Christmas recess unless they vote prior to Thanksgiving. That was their original plan, but they have been holding what they’re planning very close to the vest.
I personally do not think they will vote before McGahn’s decision is in which won’t be later than the end of November based on what the Judge said. That puts it unlikely to be voted on prior to Thanksgiving, in my opinion. They’re going to win on McGahn, and it will probably be less than 10 days for the SC to decide whether to weigh in (based on things I’ve seen, it seems unlikely they will). So, if the appeal decision happens around the 25th or so, they’ll already have a decision on McGahn prior to Kupperman’s first round decision on December 10 (at the earliest).
That’s my guess for why they dropped the Kupperman subpoena. They’ll get a decision on McGahn (probably even from SC) before that case is up, and McGahn completely supersedes any argument of someone well below McGahn’s position. The idea behind the McGahn case is that if you get to compel him, no one else can stand up to any executive privilege claims. After writing that, the timing here may have less to do with when they want to file articles of impeachment and be more related to them being able to open a bunch more cans of worms out of the McGahn decision (if the cans of worms thing is on, the inquiry could extend significantly longer).
Cliffs: I originally thought that they would vote on them no later than right before Christmas, but they could be using the McGahn decision to compel a lot more testimony related to other stuff (it’s currently very unclear whether they are willing to do multiple inquiries or are just trying to do it all now). I do not think they will vote before Thanksgiving due to wanting to wait for the McGahn decision which should be all the way through the SC by probably December 5 (as long as they decline to hear it). If the SC does want to hear McGahn (and it’s draw out to February or something), then I think right before Christmas as the latest for a vote is still on.