To impeach or not to impeach, that is the question

In the meantime, Trump Republican leaders in the Senate are busy preparing to move forward on a set of impeachment trial rules to provide cover for Trump.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is on the verge of having sufficient backing in his 53-member caucus to pass a blueprint for the trial that leaves the question of seeking witnesses and documents until after opening arguments are made, according to multiple senators.

I have no idea why Republicans are doing this. Because of Trump they lost key elections in 2018, including control of the House. Because of Trump, they have lost key elections in 2019.

Do Republicans think the American people will forget the impeachable offenses committed by Trump and the Trump Republican coverup in the November 3 elections? That's nuts. The Democrats will be around to remind Americans of the travesties.

 

Do you always talk to yourself, or are you just having trouble making your post quota?

 

Deindividuation
“This behavior is quite interesting to psychologists. They want to know why humans follow a crowd so easily. One reason for this behavior can be understood if we look at the crowd not as a bunch of random people joined together, but rather as a mob that has literally lost its mind."

"When an individual joins a mob, they experience a phenomenon known as deindividuation. Deindividuation is the loss of self-awareness and restraint.”

 

CNN reports, "Iran launched more than a dozen missiles at two Iraqi bases that hold US troops in what appears to be retaliation for the American airstrike that killed a top Iranian general last week, the Pentagon said Tuesday.

"A US official told CNN that there were no initial reports of any US casualties, but an assessment of the impact of the strikes is underway. There are casualties among the Iraqis at Ain al-Asad airbase following the attack, an Iraqi security source tells CNN. The number of casualties and whether the individuals were killed or wounded was not immediately clear.

"White House aides are making plans for a possible address to the nation by President Donald Trump, according to two officials."

"Any attack by Iran on anything American will be met with great and overwhelming force. In some areas overwhelming means obliteration," President Donald J. Trump.

This is one hell of a way to change the subject.

 

Pelosi told Democrats in a closed-door meeting Tuesday that she will not send articles of impeachment to the Senate until she learns more about how the chamber would conduct a potential trial. That would include the issue of witnesses.

It makes sense to know how a trial will be conducted before starting the trial. The reverse is also true. McConnell's position to go forward with the trial without knowing how it will proceed does not make sense, but that has been the Republicans' problem all along. Dealing with a guilty President makes them look foolish.

 

Where are Trump's fans? Why aren't they defending him?

It would seem they are in agreement with me. They haven't challenged a thing I have said. One of them has a very strange way to defend his hero. His entire focus is on me. That's weird.

 

Because nowhere in your cross-posted trolling have you presented anything he needs defending from.
But you know this.

 

McConnell cannot go forward with the trial not knowing how it will proceed as the trial, necessarily, proceeds according to the rules written by the Senate.

And McConnell need not wait for Pelosi to do anything, as he can start the trial whenever he chooses.

 

They have never effectively supported his behavior as a US President.
I believe one of them started a thread that made that suggestion.
The logic of putting him in charge of this country is either faulty or nonexistent.
The best they can do is to repeat the same lame excuses for his actions or call you Trump hater.
You must get tired of hearing that. Until Trump’s narcissism effects them personally,
their “indoctrination” will rule their minds. “…..they no not what they do.”

 

No, he cannot. McConnell has admitted that the Senate cannot proceed with the trial until Pelosi hands over the two Articles of Impeachment.

The Post reports, "Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell accused House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of “shameless game-playing” Wednesday as she reiterated that she does not plan to send articles of impeachment to the Senate until seeing proposed rules for a trial of President Trump.

"The continuing standoff between Pelosi (D-Calif.) and McConnell (R-Ky.) focused on Trump’s conduct toward Ukraine came as the president addressed the nation on hostilities with Iran, a crisis overshadowing the impeachment drama."

That is another calamitous error Trump has created all by himself. He threatened Iran with "obliteration" if Iran attacked. Iran attacked. Trump said he would impose economic sanctions.

Geez, what an idiot. This man has to be removed from office. He is a danger to our national security. No one, not the American people, not our allies, and not our enemies can trust a damn thing he says. He lies like a rug. Makes crude and baseless threats, and he is a coward, forced to back down from his toothless threats.

 

According to current senate rules.
Which he can change any time he wants.
2 minutes later, he can start the trial.

Thus:
McConnell need not wait for Pelosi to do anything, as he can start the trial whenever he chooses.

 

No, you're utterly mistaken.

You're confusing their ability to change procedural/process rules - once the trial is underway - such as which things to vote on and which to leave to the presiding officer to decide, whether to have witnesses, whether to have them testify on the floor or via closed deposition, etc. etc. - with the ability to change the trial rules.

The former can be done with a simple majority (once the trial is underway).

The latter requires a majority of 67, precisely because they are Senate rules.

So no, he can't change the senate rules any time he wants.
Thus:
Can't start the trial any time he wants.

 

The trial is not underway, and thus, he can change the rules, with just a simple majority.

 

Did you not read my post?
The RULES are SENATE rules. You can't change a senate rule without a majority of 67.

 

I did. Feel free to support your claim.

 

Maybe you should fact-check your own posts before you post them.

I would have thought this was common knowledge but here you go, from the horse's mouth.

Mitch McConnell:

“Under the Senate rules, we’re required to take it up if the House does go down that path, and we’ll follow the Senate rules,” McConnell said. “It’s a Senate rule related to impeachment that would take 67 votes to change.”
https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/mcconnell-says-cant-completely-prevent-impeachment-trial

Additionally, a Mitch video explaining that he can't start without the articles.

 

Ahh.. I seee.
Well, admittedly, this is different than I thought, mixing up procedures with rules
HOWever...
McConnell DOES have access to the Nuclear Option, which -does- only take a majority.

 

Yes, you're right - he could go nuclear. However, I think it's extremely unlikely he'd do that because it could be argued unconstitutional in the less formal sense of conflicting with the spirit of the whole process which the Framers envisioned. And perhaps raise questions about abrogating some power of the house and so forth. (Off the top of my head speculation.)

From a practical perspective it wouldn't be worth it, because the other 25 rules would still be in place. He'd have to go nuclear on all of them or continue per existing rules, in which case, not a lot would have changed, big picture wise.

Edited to add: there are 26 Senate rules for impeachment trials, covering start to finish.

 

Thank you. You saved me some time. This guy makes things up as he goes along, and truth can go to hell.

 

^^^
Irony thick enough you need a continental engineer to cut it.

 

Because of attempts by Trump to start a Middle East war as a diversion away from his Senate trial, a review of the important points of this thread is in order.

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

Update: The House has impeached Trump, but the House leadership is withholding the two Articles of Impeachment pending Senate trial rules and the calling of witnesses such as Trump's fired NSA, John Bolton.

 

Recent events have caused many to wonder. What is going on with Trump? Is it possible he is acting like a Russian puppet? Is he doing what Putin wants him to do?

Perhaps it is time to look at the facts.

We know Putin interfered in our 2016 Presidential election because he wanted Trump to become our next President.

We know that Trump's campaign manager, Paul Manafort, had Russian connections, and he is now serving a long prison sentence. Trump's deputy campaign manager, Rick Gates, also had Russian connections, and he is facing jail time.

Mike Flynn, Trump's NSA for a month, spoke illegally to the Russian ambassador and is facing jail time.

Trump's attorney general, Jeff Sessions, had contacts with the Russian ambassador during the election campaign, once in his office, and he had to recuse himself from the Russian investigation that was taking place from his office.

Trump's son, Trump's son-in-law, and Trump's campaign manager met with four Russian operatives at Trump's home, Trump Tower, in June 2016, for information on Trump's opponent, Hillary Clinton.

Nothing pleases Putin more than to see the American government in chaos.

More recently, Trump tried foreign interference in our Presidential election again. He attempted to extort the Ukrainian president to get him to dig up dirt on another political opponent, Joe Biden. This caused an impeachment inquiry.

The mission of any righteous Russian puppet would be to create chaos at the highest level of the federal government.

 

In the House debate on the Articles of Impeachment the Republicans stayed away from the evidence and used numerous distractions. They said the Democrats have wanted to impeach Trump since the day he took office. Even if true, that had nothing to do with the impeachment articles and evidence today. They said Democrats wanted to undo the results of an election that took place three years ago. Yeah, so, what does that have to do with what is happening today? They brought up a myriad of subjects, the economy, Obama administration, even quotes from the Bible and some used theatrics. One Texas Republican called the Democrats socialists, obviously speaking to his base, but to a general audience he sounded like a hick. Some Republicans didn't know what the impeachment clause said.

When Republicans did talk about the facts, they simply said they didn't exist. Their idea of dealing with the facts was to say the facts were wrong. However, they never explained that position because that meant going into specific facts, something they did not want to do.

Republicans repeated over and over again that the evidence was hearsay, totally ignoring the incriminating statements made by Trump -- twice -- and his chief of staff. That argument is based on the absence of a chain of command. According to Republicans, every member of Trump's government must get their instructions directly from Trump, and all other instructions are "hearsay," thus meaningless.

 

The Republican Party seems determined to acquit a President who invited foreign interference in our Presidential election for his personal benefit, used bribery on a foreign leader as incentive, and obstructed Congress to cover his misbehavior.

 

Yep...and they're gonna throw the biggest Superbowl party ever when they're finished.