Why I think the odds of securing 17 GOP Senator votes to convict Trump may be higher than assumed

[Torie]

My reasoning is that one can argue about, with some patina of reasonableness, however thin it might be, as to whether Trump’s lies about a stolen election, and then using incendiary rhetoric and innuendo enabling violence to “stop the steal” rise to the level of “a high crime and misdemeanor.” But this time it may be that the actual testimony at his trial may change some Senatorial hearts and minds, and their political calculus. Why is that?

What we know is that after the attack on the Capitol building, there was about a 2.5 hour delay until Trump, or somebody in the Trump administration, authorized deployment of the national guard after requests, and pleadings, from the Mayor of DC, and the governors of Virginia and Maryland. During that period, we now know that many lives in the Capitol were in great danger. We also know that Trump never inquired of Pence, who he has stated failed to do his duty, as to his well being while in grave danger. What we don’t know in detail, is what Trump himself was asked to do when, to secure the Capitol. If was asked to authorize the deployment of additional law enforcement, and just did nothing, while watching the chaos on TV, and enjoying the show, to me that is a smoking gun. There can be no debate that his actions, rather than his “mere” rhetoric, were an utter failure to defend and protect the Constitution of the United States. That to me, if proven, can leave no debate left as to his failure to uphold his oath of office, in the most horrific manner imaginable. Thus, the testimony at the trial is actually very important. What was Trump requested to do when, and what did he do, and what did he say?

Senator Rand Paul, who seems to have other priorities, has now predicted that a third of the members of the GOP may well leave the party if Trump is convicted. He obviously  thinks that is a bad thing (I have the opposite opinion of course – good riddance), and presumably many of the GOP Senators who are more interested in their own personal prospects,  rather than what is in the best interests of the nation, probably also agree that that would be a bad thing. But if the evidence proves the smoking gun, how many Pubs will leave the GOP if he is not convicted? That is the question for the more ethically challenged GOP Senators may well have to ponder, as well as their own futures in the public square.

This is a case where the facts that we do not yet know, but will come to know, in the Senate trial, with witnesses testifying under oath, may well make a critical difference.

And that is my opinion.

Addendum: Someone agrees with me about the need to build the factual record - in all of its horror.

https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/534483-why-the-senate-should-not-rush-an-impeachment-trial

[Progressive Pessimist]

I am entertaining the idea that it's likelier than expected because I think the scenario of some Republican Senators who want to run for President in 2024 possibly "boycotting" the trial under the pretense of not approving of Trump no longer being President yet being subject to it, but in reality want to have their cake and eat it too by ostensibly supporting the President while lowering the threshold for  a conviction vote to happen, thus leading to Trump being barred from holding future elected office and ensuring them an easier time in the primary. I would never put Machivellan schemes like this past ostentatious Republicans, especially since the party's brain-dead base will eat it up without recognizing the obvious cynicism.

[Non Swing Voter]

I think like 10 will vote to convict.  I don't think the odds are great mostly because I don't think there is much personal benefit to GOP Senators to convict him and the vast majority of them have proven time and again that that is all they care about. 

They are on this sinking ship.  The Trump party is too small to win nationally but abandoning it would be even more catastrophic for them.  Trump really destroyed the conservative movement in a lot of ways.  Other than ramming through a bunch of Judges (which Mitch McConnell would have done no matter what Republican was in office), Trump really screwed them long term.

[DaleCooper]

It'll be tough to gauge because I firmly believe that it'll be an all or nothing thing. Either we get 20 or more Republicans voting to convict, or we get somewhere in the 2-5 range. McConnell may say he's leaving it up to individual Senators' consciences but I think this is something they'll decide more or less collectively.

[Hermit For Peace]

Here's my narrow view, that this latest insurrection fueled by Trump's lies and his pouting ego, caused trauma to Mitch in the form of the terror his wife experienced. Does McConnell choose Trump over her? Does he forgive Trump for the chaos and loss of life that could have easily been avoided?

I don't think so. Therefore, as goes Mitch, so goes a large number of Senators voting for impeachment.

[Yoda]

I've never been optimistic about enough Senate republicans voting with dems to convict trump, but now that I think about it, if they don't convict him, they will be sealing their fate at the Party of Trump for literally decades. Do enough of them realize that this is committing to several or more election cycles of political suicide? Do enough of them care? I don't know, but I think McConnell is definitely aware of this. And if he votes to convict, we'll get the 17 republicans required to convict.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The President commands the armed forces, the President has the bully pulpit and Congress is despised throughout the land and rightfully so in a lot of ways. However, our system depends on a balance of power, depends on everyone accepting the rules of the game as they are otherwise it will all come tumbling down in the face of executive tyranny, backed up by the tyranny of the mob.

Its a slippery slope argument and a very "traditionalist" conservative mindset to have, but frankly speaking what is to stop a future President when facing a hostile Congress, from either sending a mob to raze the Capitol building, or worse the Army to do likewise? Once you enter a place where Congress acts under duress from threat of a mob or threat of the Army/Executive, the game is up.

This concern alone should in a just world command 95 Senators to vote Aye on conviction. It is not about Trump, Republicans, left or right anymore. Its about whether you want to continue to be America, or instead become Rome.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

There isn't gonna be any conviction since Trump has left office, the media has hyped this insurrection day in and day out, and it's not good to keep focusing on an impeachment that the end result is already known

[DaleCooper]

The Democrats could potentially turn Trump's trial into the next OJ or Casey Anthony trial, making the case as clear as day in an endless drip-drip news story only for the obviously guilty party to get acquitted.

It'd be a huge waste of their Senate majority though.

[Pericles]

It's all coming down to whether McConnell decides he can kill Trump's political career and stop Trump 2024, or whether he decides it would be too costly for Republican Senators to cast that vote. The Republican Party might be willing to bite the bullet if they perceive that conviction is its collective interest. However they failed to come together in 2016 when it was much easier to stop Trump, maybe they've learned from that or they'll just repeat the same mistake and let personal ambition triumph over the collective interest (sadly though, since Trump was only 0.6% away from a second term, does it really help them to ditch him?)

[brucejoel99]

I am entertaining the idea that it's likelier than expected because I think the scenario of some Republican Senators who want to run for President in 2024 possibly "boycotting" the trial under the pretense of not approving of Trump no longer being President yet being subject to it, but in reality want to have their cake and eat it too by ostensibly supporting the President while lowering the threshold for  a conviction vote to happen, thus leading to Trump being barred from holding future elected office and ensuring them an easier time in the primary. I would never put Machivellan schemes like this past ostentatious Republicans, especially since the party's brain-dead base will eat it up without recognizing the obvious cynicism.

This appears to be the line-of-thinking that Rick Scott is pursuing.

[Progressive Pessimist]

I am entertaining the idea that it's likelier than expected because I think the scenario of some Republican Senators who want to run for President in 2024 possibly "boycotting" the trial under the pretense of not approving of Trump no longer being President yet being subject to it, but in reality want to have their cake and eat it too by ostensibly supporting the President while lowering the threshold for  a conviction vote to happen, thus leading to Trump being barred from holding future elected office and ensuring them an easier time in the primary. I would never put Machivellan schemes like this past ostentatious Republicans, especially since the party's brain-dead base will eat it up without recognizing the obvious cynicism.

This appears to be the line-of-thinking that Rick Scott is pursuing.

Exactly. In reading that Scott was considering that, I figured it would be co-opted by others like Cruz, Hawley, Paul, etc. It's still a bit of a long shot but I am at least somewhat more comforted by the fact that this conviction vote actually has a chance unlike the Ukraine scandal vote which was always a non-starter.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Graham said on Sunday Fox News Today, D's don't have the 17 votes to convict, so as D's we shouldn't be obsessed with Impeachment. There you have it

Graham said they did D's a favor by solidifying Biden as the Prez by getting Pence to sign the EC vote calculator

[Ferguson97]

Graham said on Sunday Fox News Today, D's don't have the 17 votes to convict, so as D's we shouldn't be obsessed with Impeachment. There you have it

Graham said they did D's a favor by solidifying Biden as the Prez by getting Pence to sign the EC vote calculator

Oh if Lindsay Graham said it, then it must be true.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I think like 10 will vote to convict.  I don't think the odds are great mostly because I don't think there is much personal benefit to GOP Senators to convict him and the vast majority of them have proven time and again that that is all they care about.  

They are on this sinking ship.  The Trump party is too small to win nationally but abandoning it would be even more catastrophic for them.  Trump really destroyed the conservative movement in a lot of ways.  Other than ramming through a bunch of Judges (which Mitch McConnell would have done no matter what Republican was in office), Trump really screwed them long term.

That's something that's puzzled me about the whole civilization-scale disaster that has been Donald Trump's time occupying the White House.  If the GOP had even a spec of common sense, decency, or self-interest, they could have given Trump a very polite ultimatum in early February 2017: "remove yourself and your immediate family from all control over the Trump Organization within 60 days, or face impeachment for violations of the Emoluments Clauses".  

Since the Trump Organization is a hollow Gordian knot of tax doges, shell companies, and money laundering, worth basically nothing, he has no way to actually comply. Then in April, when his popularity is low (they could always change their minds and give him more time if he wasn't obviously a nascent disaster), quietly encourage the Democrats to bring impeachment charges up, let enough Republicans (those who won't electorally suffer) vote for them to get them through, and then toss him and his family, friends, and lackeys out on their rear end. Then the GOP could have relaxed and gotten from President Pence every single thing Trump gave them, with none of the downsides, while claiming they really are the responsible party that respect the Constitution.  

If they'd done this, we'd now likely be looking at another 2-4 years of GOP trifecta with Democrats hopeful they can get a majority in the House in 2022.

[Sir Mohamed]

I think it comes down to McConnell. He votes to convict, more than enough will follow. In this case, I wouldn't be surprised of the convict votes go into the low or mid 70s. If McConnell votes against or just leaves it to members, it will probably fail and not get beyond 4-5 GOP votes.

[Torie]

[I posted this on the impeachment thread, but I think I should post it here as well.]

I have posted before that the details of the facts surrounding the delay of Guard deployment and the prospects of Trump being convicted, I believe are very closely related - the potential proverbial smoking gun.

Below is a link to the  timeline that delves into the delay in deploying the National Guard. It is not clear that Trump ever authorized the deployment (rather Pence did it). Here is the relevant paragraph from the article.

"3:19 p.m.: McCarthy explains in a phone call to Sen. Chuck Schumer and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that Miller has already approved full DCNG mobilization. Miller later releases a statement saying, “Chairman Milley and I just spoke separately with the Vice President and with Speaker Pelosi, Leader McConnell, Senator Schumer and Representative Hoyer about the situation at the U.S. Capitol. We have fully activated the D.C. National Guard to assist federal and local law enforcement as they work to peacefully address the situation.” No mention is made of Trump’s involvement. [emphasis added.]

Just what the F was Trump doing during these critical hours other than squirting lighter fluid on the fire?

https://www.factcheck.org/2021/01/timeline-of-national-guard-deployment-to-capitol/

[Brittain33]

I think the challenge is that Republican Senators are weighing not just the end of their career in a bitter and brutal primary, but a lifetime of abuse and threats to them and their family from their former voters. Going out to supermarkets and getting spit on, their children and grandchildren being verbally abused by their classmates’ parents. That is more personal and imminent to them than the threat Trump poses to democracy or Congress, even after this attack.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

They will vote to ACQUIT ON CHARGE 1, REMOVED FROM OFFICE ,55/45
THEY WILL VOTE TO BAR TRUMPIANS FROM EVER HOLDING OFFICE AGAIN 51 Senators needed

This has been known from beginning

[Torie]

They will vote to ACQUIT ON CHARGE 1, REMOVED FROM OFFICE ,55/45
THEY WILL VOTE TO BAR TRUMPIANS FROM EVER HOLDING OFFICE AGAIN 51 Senators needed

This has been known from beginning

I assume that you know that the vote to bar from future office is a punishment that is levied after conviction, and thus conviction is a condition precedent to such punishment.

Addendum: Using section 3 of the 14th amendment almost certainly won't fly either unless at some point Trump is convicted in court for the subject crimes.

https://reason.com/volokh/2021/01/13/the-14th-amendment-disqualification-gambit/

[Sbane]

The President commands the armed forces, the President has the bully pulpit and Congress is despised throughout the land and rightfully so in a lot of ways. However, our system depends on a balance of power, depends on everyone accepting the rules of the game as they are otherwise it will all come tumbling down in the face of executive tyranny, backed up by the tyranny of the mob.

Its a slippery slope argument and a very "traditionalist" conservative mindset to have, but frankly speaking what is to stop a future President when facing a hostile Congress, from either sending a mob to raze the Capitol building, or worse the Army to do likewise? Once you enter a place where Congress acts under duress from threat of a mob or threat of the Army/Executive, the game is up.

This concern alone should in a just world command 95 Senators to vote Aye on conviction. It is not about Trump, Republicans, left or right anymore. Its about whether you want to continue to be America, or instead become Rome.

Excellent point. And considering the way the Senate is set up, in the future it will be much more likely the Congress is controlled by Republicans and the Presidency by the Democrats. I think Republicans have much more to fear from this than Democrats.