Trump 2nd Impeachment News/Talk Megathread

[Doomer]

What is the point of McConnell supporting impeachment? I still doubt 17 GOP senators will vote to convict, especially with Trump out of office.

I don’t think he’d allow his feelings public unless he knew the votes existed.  But I also just can’t fathom there being enough GOP senators to convict.

[DaleCooper]

What is the point of McConnell supporting impeachment? I still doubt 17 GOP senators will vote to convict, especially with Trump out of office.

It frees them from having to defend him anymore.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

What is the point of McConnell supporting impeachment? I still doubt 17 GOP senators will vote to convict, especially with Trump out of office.

It helps distance himself from Trump (in practice, anyway).

[Virginiá]

Not really surprised McConnell wanted Trump to pick Garland for the next FBI director at one point, since that would have given them another DC Circuit Court office to fill.

[Blue3]

What is the point of McConnell supporting impeachment? I still doubt 17 GOP senators will vote to convict, especially with Trump out of office.

Reporting says 20 GOP Senators already planned to convict, before the McConnell news.

Also, this could very well happen before the 20th.

It also bars Trump from running again, freeing them of any threat of him running in 2024.

[VAR]

David Valadao was sworn into office yesterday. I think he's unlikely to vote to impeach. Also, McCarthy, Valadao donors threaten to pull support if they don't vote to impeach.

[DaleCooper]

Let's also be realistic about the fact that the attack on the capitol is not going to be the last Trump-inspired act of terrorism. McConnell doesn't want his 2022 recruit in Arizona to have to defend this crap on the debate stage against Mark Kelly. For all the jokes about Young Kim's homophobia, there actually is a point where association with what the mainstream GOP has become will hurt candidates in winnable states like Arizona, New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, etc.

[Panda Express]

No war room in the White House this time. No response. Just gloom, and acceptance apparently.

To which I can only say: good.

https://twitter.com/JenniferJJacobs/status/1349330454902673409

Twitter was Trump's source of power. Without it, he's a marshmallow.

[Alcibiades]

For McConnell, getting rid of Trump is the best way to ensure the normal midterm dynamic of the non-Presidential party making gains. If Trump is still hanging around, threatening to run in 2024, it could help the Dems to upset this dynamic, as voters punish the GOP’s continuing association with the unpopular Trump.

[Kamala-Tim 2024]

What is the point of McConnell supporting impeachment? I still doubt 17 GOP senators will vote to convict, especially with Trump out of office.

Reporting says 20 GOP Senators already planned to convict, before the McConnell news.

Also, this could very well happen before the 20th.

It also bars Trump from running again, freeing them of any threat of him running in 2024.

Reporting says 20 were *open* to convicting.  Let’s not give ourselves false hope.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

(Sorry for bouncing back-and-forth between the two threads -- not sure on which one I should be posting). 

From CNN, here's the anticipated schedule for today:

-  The first debate: It will last begin after the House convenes (9:00am EST) and will [last] about an hour and it will revolve around the rules governing the impeachment article.

-  After that: The House votes on the rule. Remember: Voting in the House takes time because of coronavirus protocols (and now metal detectors, which was its own scene last night as Republicans lashed out at police and fellow members when they were asked to go through them to get to the House floor.)


-  Once the House passes the rule in the early afternoon: Representatives will proceed to a two-hour debate.


-  The final vote: We expect it will begin between 3 p.m. and 4 p.m. ET.

[Wrong about 2024 Ghost]

What is the point of McConnell supporting impeachment? I still doubt 17 GOP senators will vote to convict, especially with Trump out of office.

I don’t think he’d allow his feelings public unless he knew the votes existed.  But I also just can’t fathom there being enough GOP senators to convict.

While I'm not holding my breath for the GOP to do the right thing, there's always room for Senators who want Trump gone but are too cowardly to vote against him to just skip the trial vote, lowering the number of votes needed for conviction.

[DaleCooper]

Convicting Trump will also give Republicans a chance to get ahead of all the information that will continually get released about the terrorist attack over the upcoming weeks and months.

[Democratic Hawk]

Wonder how many Republicans would vote to impeach if it was a secret ballot but even then Trump and his deplorables would cry 'fraud'

[wbrocks67]

Convicting Trump will also give Republicans a chance to get ahead of all the information that will continually get released about the terrorist attack over the upcoming weeks and months.

Apparently some don't care - Ken Buck on CNN this morning saying that both incitement to insurrection by Trump AND Trump trying to overturn the election were both "not impeachable offenses"

It's just so exhausting that so many of our congress members are basically okay with an authoritarian dictatorship with no accountability

[Earthling]

Convicting Trump will also give Republicans a chance to get ahead of all the information that will continually get released about the terrorist attack over the upcoming weeks and months.

Apparently some don't care - Ken Buck on CNN this morning saying that both incitement to insurrection by Trump AND Trump trying to overturn the election were both "not impeachable offenses"

It's just so exhausting that so many of our congress members are basically okay with an authoritarian dictatorship with no accountability

Oh, they will care if the Democrats would do anything like this.

They don't care because it will benefit them. Party before country is the motto of most Republicans.

[Wrong about 2024 Ghost]

I was looking at Donald's incitement speech again, and noticed that among everything else, he very clearly uses the royal "we" eight minutes in.

I hope so. I hope so because if Mike Pence does the right thing, we win the election. All he has to do. This is from the number one or certainly one of the top constitutional lawyers in our country. He has the absolute right to do it. We’re supposed to protect our country, support our country, support our constitution, and protect our constitution. States want to revote. The States got defrauded. They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to recertify. They want it back. All Vice-President Pence has to do is send it back to the States to recertify, and we become president, and you are the happiest people.

Donald has always been sloppy with his personal pronouns, but so far as I remember there's typically been some deniability behind his nosism; he could have been using the editorial, authorial or patronizing 'we', speaking for the White House, the GOP, etc. But here there's no room for that. He's explicitly referring to becoming president, which is a singular noun and very clearly refers only to himself, and he follows it by separately referring to the crowd making it explicit that he's referring to them separately from himself becoming president.

That it's openly a confession of his intent to use mob violence to seize power is objectively far more damning, but I found the open use of the majestic plural to be noteworthy.

[Sir Mohamed]

I'm watching it now, got up a little early before. Truly remarkable Mr. Trump has managed to get impeached twice in a single term of office.

[Torrain]

Rules Committee Chair and Ranking Member talking now.

Tom Cole (R-OK) has gone full "both-sides" and claimed that impeachment will be more divisive than the events of the 6th of Jan.

It's galling.

He's calling it a "snap-impeachment", and saying that the trial is a dangerous breach of precedence.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

Rules Committee Chair and Ranking Member talking now.

Tom Cole (R-OK) has gone full "both-sides" and claimed that impeachment will be more divisive than the events of the 6th of Jan.

It's galling.

He's calling it a "snap-impeachment", and saying that the trial is a dangerous breach of precedence.

I'd say that armed rioters storming the Capitol is a dangerous breach of precedence. 

[Sir Mohamed]

While I appreciate McConnell finally moving on Trump, he hardly deserves any credit. Moving forward to impeach a POTUS of your own party takes more courage when there is something at stake. For McConnell, there is nothing more to lose. Trump's term of office is almost over anyway, his majority is lost and McConnell just got reelected to another 6 year term, very like his last one.

[Badger]

Convicting Trump will also give Republicans a chance to get ahead of all the information that will continually get released about the terrorist attack over the upcoming weeks and months.

Apparently some don't care - Ken Buck on CNN this morning saying that both incitement to insurrection by Trump AND Trump trying to overturn the election were both "not impeachable offenses"

It's just so exhausting that so many of our congress members are basically okay with an authoritarian dictatorship with no accountability

Oh, they will care if the Democrats would do anything like this.

They don't care because it will benefit them. Party before country is the motto of most Republicans.

[7,052,770]

Rules Committee Chair and Ranking Member talking now.

Tom Cole (R-OK) has gone full "both-sides" and claimed that impeachment will be more divisive than the events of the 6th of Jan.

It's galling.

He's calling it a "snap-impeachment", and saying that the trial is a dangerous breach of precedence.

Ridiculous. Does he think John Quincy Adams or whoever wouldn't have been impeached had he sent a mob to the Capitol to kill the VP/Congressmen in order to try to overturn an election?

[Torrain]

All the GOP speeches so far have gone the same way -

"We wanna thank the Capitol police, and all those who protected us. This must not happen again. But.....

Let's not actually hold the President accountable, that would be ludicrous."

[Torrain]

Both GOP speakers have offered a bipartisan commission, in the mould of the 9/11 congressional commission, in lieu of impeachment.

Two points:
1. Why not both?
2. Are you threatening not to support the inevitable investigation that will be set up, if the Dems progress with impeachment today?