Trump 2nd Impeachment News/Talk Megathread

[Badger]

As far as I know, he's been taking all of the necessary steps & doing what he needs to be doing to run for re-election. Of course, the difference between him & Byrd is that Leahy - be it in committee, on the floor, in interviews, in his wonderful movie cameos, etc. - is very much still on top of his game. He's very much a super-ager like Biden rather than a Feinstein or a Thurmond.

Patrick Leahy is awesome. However, it's time for him to step aside and let a fresh face succeed him. I hope that he doesn't run for re-election next year.

He's been in office for over 46 years. That's just mind boggling. There have been 9 presidents during his time as a U.S. senator.

It's funny how US politicians just seem to stay in office until they die, become ill or are voted out.

In Denmark, politicians are generally regarded as "over the hill" when they hit 60 and most just leave politics around that point. It's very very rare for active politians to be over 70 in Denmark.

Both extremes are a bit sad, honestly. You shouldn't feel too old for politics because you are over 60. But on the other hand having the political system dominated by 80 year olds doesn't seem optimal either.

I feel hypocritical in on the one hand criticizing the gynocracy Washington has become, all the while thinking how good it is to have someone with the institutional knowledge and experience of Leahy in office. I suppose of all the senior citizens in Congress were like Leahy, that would be a huge Improvement.

[VAR]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1353878866604011529

[Badger]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1353878866604011529

Translation: I'm waiting for permission from Daddy Mitch.

[Coconut Decider]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1353878866604011529

This is an optimistic development. I think we have to remember that Cornyn and Rubio aren't necessary on the path to conviction.

[SteveRogers]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1353878866604011529

Translation: I'm waiting for permission from Daddy Mitch.

Yep. There’s either going to be only 5-6 GOP votes for conviction or there’s going to be like 20. It all depends on Mitch.

[Dwarven Dragon]

Live Quorum going on now to begin the Trial

[Dwarven Dragon]

Senators are being sworn in

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

I have changed my vote in this thread from "No" to "Yes," with these thoughts in mind:

I still do not believe it is accurate and appropriate to accuse Trump of inciting the riot that occurred at the Capitol. During the speech at the rally that day, Trump explicitly told the audience that he expected them to be PEACEFUL when they marched to the Capitol. He never told the crowd to enter the Capitol building and he never told the crowd to do anything that stops Congress from counting the electoral college ballots. The individuals of the crowd who did enter the Capitol building probably had it in mind to do so ever since they made their plan to go to Washington D.C. that day, but Trump himself did not encourage them to do what they did. That was why I voted "No" to begin with, and I stand by that assessment.

But I have since decided that Trump does deserve the impeachment article that passed the House because of the portion of the article that observes "⁠President Trump urged the secretary of state of Georgia, Brad Raffensperger, to 'find' enough votes to overturn the Georgia Presidential election results and threatened Secretary Raffensperger if he failed to do so."

I supported the first articles of impeachment against Trump -- those that passed the House in December 2019 -- and in the 2018 elections I was rooting for the Democrats to retake the House precisely because I did want Trump to be impeached.

This would make sense to me if they had separated the articles of impeachment so that one could vote for one but not the other, but they didn't.  If you vote for the charge, I think you are committing yourself to saying that he is guilty of everything contained in the charge.

[Penn_Quaker_Girl]

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1353878866604011529

"Having said that..."

[emailking]

If 45 Senators think the trial is unconstitutional I don't see a conviction happening unless Mitch starts whipping this.

[Gass3268]

If 45 Senators think the trial is unconstitutional I don't see a conviction happening unless Mitch starts whipping this.

Mitch was one of the 45, this is done. Trump supporters are a cult.

[GALeftist]

If 45 Senators think the trial is unconstitutional I don't see a conviction happening unless Mitch starts whipping this.

McConnell was one of the people who voted not to table. I don't think that necessarily means he thinks it's unconstitutional.

[President Johnson]

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1354165177881681922

[Oryxslayer]

What we saw is what would happen if everyone isn't told by McConnell to vote to convict: only 4 to 5 GOP'ers would defect. The green light still has yet to be given.

[brucejoel99]

If 45 Senators think the trial is unconstitutional I don't see a conviction happening unless Mitch starts whipping this.

McConnell was one of the people who voted not to table. I don't think that necessarily means he thinks it's unconstitutional.

Literally this, so everybody on here better calm down before y'all start with the histrionics over this just like you did yesterday when Manchin/Sinema gave McConnell their laughably meaningless filibuster "assurances." At most, we can say that the 17 Senators who voted against the pre-trial process resolution think that all of this is unconstitutional. In contrast, the other 28 Republicans who voted to not table Paul's resolution before immediately voting for the process resolution clearly don't think that the trial is unconstitutional (otherwise, they would've just joined the 17 who voted against the process resolution) so much as they think that the question of jurisdiction should've been given a full Senate debate here at the outset, hence their opposition to immediately tabling it without debate.

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

If 45 Senators think the trial is unconstitutional I don't see a conviction happening unless Mitch starts whipping this.

This trial is DOA

[Badger]

If 45 Senators think the trial is unconstitutional I don't see a conviction happening unless Mitch starts whipping this.

This trial is DOA

Not at all necessarily. There's been discussion by several Republican senators of boycotting the final vote based on their claim of it being unconstitutional. All that does is lower the 2/3 threshold. It would not surprise me in the least to see a number of those 45 votes to table take that route.

Of course if they don't, yes, DOA indeed

[emailking]

I'm just going by how it was being discussed on MSNBC (and also how it's discussed in that article). I guess yea you could vote not to set aside his objection while also not agreeing with his objection. 🤷‍♂️

[Grumpier Than Uncle Joe]

Paul's point of order was simply done to take a test vote.  I don't think he cares that it didn't pass.  Seeing the count was the real motivation, IMO.

[Mr.Bakari-Sellers]

The vote was 55/45, that is the final vote count for CONVICTION, the D's don't have Ernst, Daines, or Rick Scott to move forward on CONVICTION which was already known.

Waste of money, we should be in Covid

They D's have an excellent criminal case against Trump but not Impeachment

KKK like QAnom have existed since the beginning

[brucejoel99]

I'm just going by how it was being discussed on MSNBC

Well, there's your problem. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool liberal too, but even I wouldn't exactly trust MSNBC to give an objective lowdown on the nuance of Senate procedure & Republican use thereof.

[pppolitics]

The vote was 55/45, that is the final vote count for CONVICTION, the D's don't have Ernst, Daines, or Rick Scott to move forward on CONVICTION which was already known.

Waste of money, we should be in Covid

They D's have an excellent criminal case against Trump but not Impeachment

KKK like QAnom have existed since the beginning

Wrong.

It's not a waste of money.

Democrats will get to use the impeachment to bash Republicans for years to come.

After all, Democrats now have indisputable evidence that Republicans don't believe in laws or democracy.

The Republican Party has now become the party of right-wing terrorists.

[Mr.Bakari-Sellers]

The vote was 55/45, that is the final vote count for CONVICTION, the D's don't have Ernst, Daines, or Rick Scott to move forward on CONVICTION which was already known.

Waste of money, we should be in Covid

They D's have an excellent criminal case against Trump but not Impeachment

KKK like QAnom have existed since the beginning

Wrong.

It's not a waste of money.

Democrats will get to use the impeachment to bash Republicans for years to come.

After all, Democrats now have indisputable evidence that Republicans don't believe in laws or democracy.

The Republican Party has now become the party of right-wing terrorists.

It is a waste of money, not everyone received their Stimulus checks of 1200 or 600 and tax refunds from last yr have been delayed

Just because YOU OR A NEIGHBOR GOT THEIR 600 DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING

IT COST MONEY TO RUN IMPEACHMENT

[Dwarven Dragon]

Paul raised a point of Order that the trial is unconstitutional. It was rejected 55-45, with Collins, Murkowski, Romney, Sasse, and Toomey joining Dems.

https://twitter.com/SenatePress/status/1354164503601172489

[pppolitics]

The vote was 55/45, that is the final vote count for CONVICTION, the D's don't have Ernst, Daines, or Rick Scott to move forward on CONVICTION which was already known.

Waste of money, we should be in Covid

They D's have an excellent criminal case against Trump but not Impeachment

KKK like QAnom have existed since the beginning

Wrong.

It's not a waste of money.

Democrats will get to use the impeachment to bash Republicans for years to come.

After all, Democrats now have indisputable evidence that Republicans don't believe in laws or democracy.

The Republican Party has now become the party of right-wing terrorists.

It is a waste of money, not everyone received their Stimulus checks of 1200 or 600 and tax refunds from last yr have been delayed

Just because YOU OR A NEIGHBOR GOT THEIR 600 DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING

IT COST MONEY TO RUN IMPEACHMENT

...money well spent