Split Thread A second impeachment

Watching the impeachment 2.0 charade on tv.... I've now come to the conclusion that the USA is no more. It is utterly, completely, and royally FUBAR'd from this day forward.

Republicans are spending their 30-60 second time slots to play whataboutisms and partisan ad hominems. Yeah... The USA can't even set aside it's myopic political circus for 5 minutes to come together and agree that Jan 6th was an abomination on the very fabric of the country, brought on by the nonstop attack of its electoral processes by the very person who is supposed to be not only leading the country and protecting the people, but also protecting the very governance of said country that he's been trying to undermine since his loss in November.

It was his claims of election fraud that fueled this mob to attack the capitol building. Period. Just that alone in and of itself is reason enough to impeach him and forbid him to ever hold office again, nevermind his riling up of the mob right before the march to the building. The simple fact of the matter is that this putz reneged on one of his most important job descriptions... to uphold the governance of the country by way of respecting the laws of the land. He failed bigly at one of the most easiest aspects of his job.

And this basket of deplorables can't even be honest with themselves about it? FFS.

Yup, so long as this republican party continues to exist, the USA is done for. Our great great grandchildren will be reading about this in their history books under the chapter titled: "The Country That Used To Be".

Un-fricken-believable. :mad:
 
dasmiller said:
Would McConnell have any reason to fear a brief Pence presidency? I can't think of one, but maybe I'm missing something.
Click to expand...

I don't think he likes Pence enough to let him be president, even if just for a day.

And, as others mentioned, Pence may pardon Trump.
 
Border Reiver said:
At this stage I'm expecting, "Ladies and gentlemen of the Senate, the President was in no way inciting a disturbance in his speech of 6 January 2020. What he did was give veiled instructions to a crowd that had been prepared far enough in advance to prepare a mobile gallows. Since his words were obviously not intended to bring incite persons to action, but rather to give them the go ahead to carry out previously agreed to courses of action, his words do not meet the strict definition of the term and you must acquit."
Click to expand...
I like that. I hope someone does say that. But it doesn't matter. This isn't a court of law. I'm guessing for most senators it will come down to the politics of their next re-election bid.
 
AnonyMoose said:
Watching the impeachment 2.0 charade on tv.... I've now come to the conclusion that the USA is no more. It is utterly, completely, and royally FUBAR'd from this day forward.

Republicans are spending their 30-60 second time slots to play whataboutisms and partisan ad hominems. Yeah... The USA can't even set aside it's myopic political circus for 5 minutes to come together and agree that Jan 6th was an abomination on the very fabric of the country, brought on by the nonstop attack of its electoral processes by the very person who is supposed to be not only leading the country and protecting the people, but also protecting the very governance of said country that he's been trying to undermine since his loss in November.

It was his claims of election fraud that fueled this mob to attack the capitol building. Period. Just that alone in and of itself is reason enough to impeach him and forbid him to ever hold office again, nevermind his riling up of the mob right before the march to the building. The simple fact of the matter is that this putz reneged on one of his most important job descriptions... to uphold the governance of the country by way of respecting the laws of the land. He failed bigly at one of the most easiest aspects of his job.

And this basket of deplorables can't even be honest with themselves about it? FFS.

Yup, so long as this republican party continues to exist, the USA is done for. Our great great grandchildren will be reading about this in their history books under the chapter titled: "The Country That Used To Be".

Un-fricken-believable. :mad:
Click to expand...

Venting much.
 
JoeMorgue said:
Again the idea the Senators can just... like not vote is already stupid to me. I mean that's literally your job.

The idea that they can't do it during an impeachment is worse.

When you're a member of Congress and the decision is on this level, you shouldn't get to stay in the corner.
Click to expand...


Stupidity is not an uncommon affliction among Trump supporters.
 
Nova Land said:
People keep saying that if the house votes to impeach Donald Trump then 67 votes are needed in the senate to convict him. For example, here's a quote from USA Today:




That is not correct. It does not require at least 67 members to support conviction, and it would be good for people to stop repeating that inaccuracy.

Ah, you may be thinking, but there are 100 senators, and the constitution says it takes a vote of 2/3 of the senators to convict, so that means it takes at least 67 senators. But that's a careless misreading of what the constitution actually says.

The relevant passage is in article I, section 3 of the US constitution. Here it is:




People keep saying we need 2/3 of the votes of the senate membership -- i.e. 67 votes -- to convict Trump. That's not what the constitution says. What the constitution says is that it takes 2/3 of the votes of those present.

If every senator were present, that would be 67 out of 100, but it's a mistake to assume 100 senators will be present. In fact, there almost certainly won't be if the impeachment trial occurs immediately, as at present there are only 99 senators, David Perdue's term having expired and Jon Ossoff not having been confirmed yet. So if all 99 members were present it would take 66 votes to convict.

But there is also no reason to assume all 99 members will be present. Very often the senate convenes and does business with less than all members present, which is why senate rules include a quorum requirement. The constitution addresses this in Article 1, Section 5: "Each House shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members, and a Majority of each shall constitute a Quorum to do Business." So a senate quorum is 50 at the moment, and will go back up to 51 after we return to having 100 senators.

If fewer than 100 senators are present, then fewer than 67 votes are needed to convict. So instead of focusing on trying to win the votes of the Republicans who are determined not to vote for impeachment, I think it would be smarter for those who'd like to see Trump removed from office to focus on trying to convince as many of those Republican senators as possible to boycott the impeachment trial. We refuse to dignify these proceedings by taking any part in them, Republican senators who want to at least appear to support Donald Trump could say, as a way to try to stay on the good side of the pro-Trumpers while allowing them to avoid actually going on record as voting to acquit him.

There are currently 99 senators, which includes 46 Democrats and 2 Democratic-voting indies. Let's assume all of them show up for the trial and all of them vote to convict, and consider how Republican attendance at the trial would affect things.

(a) If every senator showed up it would require 66 votes to convict, so those working for impeachment would need to get 18 Republican votes. That could be very hard to get.

(b) If 9 senators stayed home, those working for impeachment would need 60 out of 90 votes to convict. That means 12 Republican votes would be needed -- which would also probably be very hard to get...

(c) But suppose 18 Republicans could be persuaded to stand firm in opposition to the impeachment by refusing to attend the impeachment trial. Now there'd be 81 senators present, so it would require only 54 votes to convict. That means if 6 Republicans vote to convict, Donald Trump is convicted and removed from office. And that seems like a number the impeachment side might actually be able to attain.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I do not believe that you are entirely correct.

While you are correct in what the US Constitution has to say about '2/3 of the Senators present'.

But it is my understanding that according to the rules of the Senate, that unless a senator has some terribly important reason for being absent, then all 100 of the senators must be present when the Senate is going through a Presidential impeachment trial.

As such, it will take at least 67 senators to convict Trump.
 
Crossbow said:
Sorry, but I do not believe that you are entirely correct.

While you are correct in what the US Constitution has to say about '2/3 of the Senators present'.

But it is my understanding that according to the rules of the Senate, that unless a senator has some terribly important reason for being absent, then all 100 of the senators must be present when the Senate is going through a Presidential impeachment trial.

As such, it will take at least 67 senators to convict Trump.
Click to expand...

Well 66 as long as they are only at 99 senators.
 
Crossbow said:
Sorry, but I do not believe that you are entirely correct.

While you are correct in what the US Constitution has to say about '2/3 of the Senators present'.

But it is my understanding that according to the rules of the Senate, that unless a senator has some terribly important reason for being absent, then all 100 of the senators must be present when the Senate is going through a Presidential impeachment trial.

As such, it will take at least 67 senators to convict Trump.
Click to expand...

This is like the rule against abstentions. They have to have a reason, but only need to state it upon being pressed by the Senate. In other words it can be ignored with a wink and a nod.
 
William Parcher said:
I don't know how it works. Is there going to be a vote today on impeachment? Will we know today if it happens, or tomorrow, or what?
Click to expand...

My understanding is the plan is there is to be a vote today. I doubt they will deviate from that plan.
 
9 Republicans have voted Aye, no Democrats have voted Nay. Waiting on the last 24 votes.
 
dudalb said:
Venting much.
Click to expand...

Yes. Yes I am.

Sitting on your ass whining about an internet forum vent rather than getting on the phone and demanding some answers from your government because this is just a big ol' nothing burger much? Yes. Yes you are.

st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg
 
217 for Impeahcment. Trump is impeached for a second time.
This had to be done, but I got a feeling that all hell is going break lose next week. This will inflame the MAGA Maniacs.
 
Now 10 Republican Yeas.

As someone remarked, the most bipartisan presidential impeachment in US history.
 
AnonyMoose said:
Yes. Yes I am.

Sitting on your ass whining about an internet forum vent rather than getting on the phone and demanding some answers from your government because this is just a big ol' nothing burger much? Yes. Yes you are.

[qimg]https://ih1.redbubble.net/image.1605641815.3990/st,small,507x507-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...

Oh i have been emailin my Representatives and Senators about this
Probme is you attitude is so full of despair and fashionalbe angst that is helps nobody but the Trumpites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom