The Trump Presidency

57Brave said:
I'm not so sure the Senate doesn't convict where two weeks ago I thought it impossible.

Up for re-election 2020
Alabama Democratic Party Doug Jones 2017 1.7%
Alaska Republican Party Dan Sullivan 2014 2.2%
Arizona Republican Party Martha McSally N/A 13.7%
Arkansas Republican Party Tom Cotton 2014 17.0%
Colorado Republican Party Cory Gardner 2014 1.9%
Delaware Democratic Party Chris Coons 2010 13.6%
Georgia Republican Party David Perdue 2014 7.7%
Georgia Republican Party Johnny Isakson 2004 13.8%
Idaho Republican Party Jim Risch 2008 30.6%
Illinois Democratic Party Dick Durbin 1996 10.8%
Iowa Republican Party Joni Ernst 2014 8.3%
Kansas Republican Party Pat Roberts 1996 10.6%
Kentucky Republican Party Mitch McConnell 1984 15.5%
Louisiana Republican Party Bill Cassidy 2014 11.8%
Maine Republican Party Susan Collins 1996 36.2%
Massachusetts Democratic Party Ed Markey 2013 22.8%
Michigan Democratic Party Gary Peters 2014 13.3%
Minnesota Democratic Party Tina Smith 2018 10.6%
Mississippi Republican Party Cindy Hyde-Smith 2018 7.2%
Montana Republican Party Steve Daines 2014 17.7%
Nebraska Republican Party Ben Sasse 2014 32.9%
New Hampshire Democratic Party Jeanne Shaheen 2008 3.3%
New Jersey Democratic Party Cory Booker 2013 13.5%
New Mexico Democratic Party Tom Udall 2008 11.2%
North Carolina Republican Party Thom Tillis 2014 1.5%
Oklahoma Republican Party Jim Inhofe 1994 39.5%
Oregon Democratic Party Jeff Merkley 2008 18.8%
Rhode Island Democratic Party Jack Reed 1996 41.4%
South Carolina Republican Party Lindsey Graham 2002 15.7%
South Dakota Republican Party Mike Rounds 2014 20.9%
Tennessee Republican Party Lamar Alexander 2014 30.0%
Texas Republican Party John Cornyn 2002 27.2%
Virginia Democratic Party Mark Warner 2008 0.8%
West Virginia Republican Party Shelley Moore Capito 2014 27.6%
Wyoming Republican Party Mike Enzi 1996 54.8%
............

I count 12 (R) closer than should be's
Click to expand...

conviction ain't happening...but if say 5 Republican senators tell McConnell they will vote to convict maybe Mitch organizes a little visit to the White House...at the moment I think there are 3 likely GOP votes to convict (Mitt, Murkowski and Collins)...you need someone who comes more from the core of the party...those 3 are kind of outsiders
 
I think conviction is totally on the table, my understanding and correct me if I am wrong, but conviction is a majority while removal requires 2/3
????

After today and wondering what else- then doing the math --- I dont see removal as far fetched
 
57Brave said:
I think conviction is totally on the table, my understanding and correct me if I am wrong, but conviction is a majority while removal requires 2/3
????
Click to expand...

To pass the House and send it to the Senate is a simple majority. To pass the Senate is 2/3rds, which is also removal.

I personally think there's maybe a 5% chance of conviction. It's very, very unlikely, but I do not believe it is impossible. If the polling numbers and (already suffering) campaign donations somehow change so drastically that GOP Sens have to worry they'll get voted out because of Trump, he's gone.
 
57Brave said:
I think conviction is totally on the table, my understanding and correct me if I am wrong, but conviction is a majority while removal requires 2/3
????

After today and wondering what else- then doing the math --- I dont see removal as far fetched
Click to expand...

two thirds for conviction and removal
 
Greg Sargent
@ThePlumLineGS


The bottom line on all this is that every single Republican in that hearing

today is absolutely fine with Trump using the power of his office to press a

foreign leader to help him absolve Russia of sabotaging the 2016 election and

help him rig the next one on his behalf as well.

Ezra Klein
@ezraklein


I’m a broken record on this, but the impeachment process isn’t revealing

what Trump did. We already knew that. It’s revealing what the Republican Party

will accept, and even defend.
 
The Chosen One said:
kind of too late in the game to try a new PR strategy.

it would make them look very bad to go from none of this ever happened to yes it did happened but it’s not illegal.

then again they kept moving the goalposts on collusion so there’s that too.
Click to expand...

I suppose you could argue what is being alleged isn't a crime without admitting it. Just say "The allegations are spurious and even if true would not be criminal. This is simply a case of the left attempting to hoodwink America for their own political gain."
 
Here's the money quote from the Blagojevich case:

"It would not be plausible to describe a political trade of favors as an offer or attempt to bribe the other side."
 
striker42 said:
Essentially, the court determined that this offer to Obama was a form of logrolling and said that holding politicians swapping official acts would criminalize essentially every politician.
Click to expand...

Striker just slipped us the solution to most of our problems.
 
What Shiff is establishing was that Trump investigating only the Bidens was not an official act but a personal one.
By definition - not log rolling
Unless of course one considers Trump re election campaign an official endeavor.
 
nsacpi said:
two thirds for conviction and removal
Click to expand...


Theres also a vote to disqualify him from running again. Might seem like a formality if he Is removed but you never know.




The Senate trial is going to be interesting because Republicans will control the process. Trump is surely going to **** all over Justice Roberts. I think Republicans are going to try to make the case that he did it but it's not worth removing him over. That's really all they got left. Then it's going to be up to voters. If Trump gets reelected after this blatant corruption we are in a constitutional crisis.
 
cajunrevenge said:
Theres also a vote to disqualify him from running again. Might seem like a formality if he Is removed but you never know.




The Senate trial is going to be interesting because Republicans will control the process. Trump is surely going to **** all over Justice Roberts. I think Republicans are going to try to make the case that he did it but it's not worth removing him over. That's really all they got left. Then it's going to be up to voters. If Trump gets reelected after this blatant corruption we are in a constitutional crisis.
Click to expand...

Year 1: Can't impeach because it's a partisan hit job.
Year 2: Can't because it's a mid-term year.
Year 3: Can't because the election is a year away, let the voters decide.
Year 4: Can't because it's an election year. Let the voter's decide.

According to these bullets it's impossible to ever impeach anyone (unless it's a Dem).
 
The Chosen One said:
Year 1: Can't impeach because it's a partisan hit job.
Year 2: Can't because it's a mid-term year.
Year 3: Can't because the election is a year away, let the voters decide.
Year 4: Can't because it's an election year. Let the voter's decide.

According to these bullets it's impossible to ever impeach anyone (unless it's a Dem).
Click to expand...

It’s really convenient the bs rules republicans make for themselves
 
cajunrevenge said:
Theres also a vote to disqualify him from running again. Might seem like a formality if he Is removed but you never know.




The Senate trial is going to be interesting because Republicans will control the process. Trump is surely going to **** all over Justice Roberts. I think Republicans are going to try to make the case that he did it but it's not worth removing him over. That's really all they got left. Then it's going to be up to voters. If Trump gets reelected after this blatant corruption we are in a constitutional crisis.
Click to expand...

The Senate doesn't even have to take it up. The Constitution grants the Senate the sole power to try an impeachment case. There's no constitutional mandate that they do so. It's actually the same language as that giving the house the sole power to impeach. Since there's no mandate that the House exercise its power to pass articles of impeachment, there's similarly no mandate for the Senate to exercise its power to try the case.

If they do take it up, they could also literally immediately vote to dismiss all of the charges without even holding a trial.

Now I don't think they'll do that. They'll use their chance to control the process to hold the same kind of circus the Dems have been holding for no other reason than PR.

I also disagree that it will be a constitutional crisis if he's reelected after this. Lord knows we've had plenty of worse situations in the past. A President using official power to try to advance his own career is hardly a blip on the radar considering the true horrors committed by Presidents before him.

I honestly consider the bigger threat to be a failed use of the impeachment power. I think too many on the left are letting their hatred of Trump blind them to the realities of the situation. Impeaching Trump and failing to remove him from office does little except undermine the legitimacy of the threat of impeachment, stirs up Trump's base making them more angry and so more likely to vote, deepens the divisivness that already consumes US politics, and emboldens Trump in the future.

Impeaching him without knowing he's likely going to be removed from office would be nothing but a release of frustration by the left that would do more harm than good. Pelosi has been well aware of this fact which is probably why she opposed impeachment for so long.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top