What will happen from the impeachment?

[funinspace]

There is no actual risk for him, unless something far stronger is presented.

For instance? Something on wheels with such a big motor that it could outrun those galloping goalposts?
I can't imagine it.

There are no galloping goalposts, just misreadings of my previous posts. Regardless, the point remains that many Democrats and several large media outlets paint a picture of Trump on the brink of being removed.

WTF? Who/what are you watching? I watch some CNN and NBC News as far as mainstream goes, and I absolutely do not see such a 'picture' being painted of FFvC's removal. Impeachment by the House, yeah 98% chance. Removal by the Senate, not very likely, and so says the imagery from the 'mainstream media outlets' that I've seen.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

This poll is missing negative options/predictions. Not only will Trump not be removed from office, but he will benefit from the hearings, gaining momentum and backers as he goes around rightly claiming to not have been found guilty, and motivating people to vote for him by adding credence to his "witch hunt" narrative. And that's regardless of how much evidence surfaces that he has committed crimes. Your nation is that politically polarized.

 

[Elixir]

There is no actual risk for him, unless something far stronger is presented.

For instance? Something on wheels with such a big motor that it could outrun those galloping goalposts?
I can't imagine it.

There are no galloping goalposts

WUT???
"There was no quid pro quo"
"There may have been a quid pro quo but it's not Trump's idea"
"Okay there WAS a quid pro quo but still not Trump's idea - no first hand evidence."
"Okay, there was a quid pro quo and it was Trump's idea but it's not illegal"
"Okay it might have been illegal but it's not a high crime"
etc etc etc etc

... the point remains that many Democrats and several large media outlets paint a picture of Trump on the brink of being removed.

I don't see that. I see I high likelihood that the electoral process is already too corrupted by the GOP for Trump to be removed even if he starts shooting everyone who criticizes him, right on the Senate floor.

Putin has the goods on Trump, and every single member of Congress hoping for a ride on Trump's coattails is dependent on Putin to hold his fire, so they are kissing his butt on command.

Turtle - the jury foreman - is 100% OWNED by Putin, since he has staked his re-election on an economy in KY that is improved only because of massive investments by Russian oligarchs (connected to the Kremlin). Moscow Mitch has already declared the outcome of a Senate trial - it will be a joke, and Putin will be laughing all the way home. Even the Republican Senators will have a hard time keeping a straight face, knowing what a farce it is to pretend to seek truth as jurors, when the jury foreman has already announced the verdict, even before proceedings have begun. Nevertheless they are fully geared up to ignore the facts and vote to acquit, regardless of how much evidence is presented or how heinous Trump's actions have been.

When you say "far stronger", WTF are you talking about??? What would it take? Windsock Graham said a few weeks ago that "if there was a quid pro quo, that would be really bad", but when cheato's main man unequivocally stated that there was a quid pro quo, Windsock Lindsey had not one thing to say about it.

(Moving goalposts again)

PLEASE - tell us what "far stronger" could possibly look like. (Maybe consult the Einzbern Master?)
I still can't even imagine it, short of Putin dropping the bomb on Trump.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This poll is missing negative options/predictions. Not only will Trump not be removed from office, but he will benefit from the hearings, gaining momentum and backers as he goes around rightly claiming to not have been found guilty...

He can be found not guilty with a majority of conviction votes. The optics of that are not good.

...and motivating people to vote for him by adding credence to his "witch hunt" narrative. And that's regardless of how much evidence surfaces that he has committed crimes. Your nation is that politically polarized.

You think his supporters are energized? You did notice the 2018 results, right? While Trump defies convention, the liberals are enraged and engaged... and there is plenty of time for more truth to come out or more malfeasance to be played out by McConnell. And if this Nunes thing has wings... it could shatter the House.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

This poll is missing negative options/predictions. Not only will Trump not be removed from office, but he will benefit from the hearings, gaining momentum and backers as he goes around rightly claiming to not have been found guilty...

He can be found not guilty with a majority of conviction votes. The optics of that are not good.

...and motivating people to vote for him by adding credence to his "witch hunt" narrative. And that's regardless of how much evidence surfaces that he has committed crimes. Your nation is that politically polarized.

You think his supporters are energized? You did notice the 2018 results, right? While Trump defies convention, the liberals are enraged and engaged... and there is plenty of time for more truth to come out or more malfeasance to be played out by McConnell. And if this Nunes thing has wings... it could shatter the House.

It could. But I won't hold my breath. And I don't think it matters how bad the optics objectively are against Trump. I think the US is so politically partisan that Republicans will still find excuses to defend him and his people will vote for him. It remains to be seen if the liberals will turn out in as big numbers where and when it matters.

The media reporting on this overestimates how much the average citizen knows or cares about what's going on in Washington. I think the way to win the Whitehouse for the Democrats is by pushing for reforms that everyone will recognize as benefiting them. Big changes for the better. A message of hope and change. Universal health care, universal basic income, etc. The more the Democrats talk about Trump, including talking about impeachment, the more the positive message of change is drowned out, the better Trump's chances are to win.

As Yang keeps saying, and he's absolutely right, you need to focus on what got Trump elected in the first place. Loss of jobs, lack of social assistance, etc. Trump is your President because he said he wanted to "Make America Great Again" (he lied) and because Hillary said "America's already great".

 

[Toni]

This poll is missing negative options/predictions. Not only will Trump not be removed from office, but he will benefit from the hearings, gaining momentum and backers as he goes around rightly claiming to not have been found guilty...

He can be found not guilty with a majority of conviction votes. The optics of that are not good.

...and motivating people to vote for him by adding credence to his "witch hunt" narrative. And that's regardless of how much evidence surfaces that he has committed crimes. Your nation is that politically polarized.

You think his supporters are energized? You did notice the 2018 results, right? While Trump defies convention, the liberals are enraged and engaged... and there is plenty of time for more truth to come out or more malfeasance to be played out by McConnell. And if this Nunes thing has wings... it could shatter the House.

Plus, all those photo ops with supporters right behind him, wearing MAGA swag? Many times, they are either paid or forced to be there by their employers.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

This poll is missing negative options/predictions. Not only will Trump not be removed from office, but he will benefit from the hearings, gaining momentum and backers as he goes around rightly claiming to not have been found guilty, and motivating people to vote for him by adding credence to his "witch hunt" narrative. And that's regardless of how much evidence surfaces that he has committed crimes. Your nation is that politically polarized.

These things are not Senate consequences to the President. Also, they are a different dimension than such consequences. While they may be correlated more toward opposing outcomes, they are not completely independent. For example, Trump could both be removed from office AND have poll numbers improve. Anyway, the op is about how the Senate will vote eventually, assuming this thing moves into those later phases. Now if you had said the Senate could vote with non-binding resolution that it was a witch hunt, that could be another matter.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

From a more recent poll (November 19-20) conducted by Reuters/Ipsos (in conjunction with 538):



The numbers for the Independents still being the key element, with a full 45% in favor of impeachment and a huge 28% open to being convinced.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

He can be found not guilty with a majority of conviction votes. The optics of that are not good.
You think his supporters are energized? You did notice the 2018 results, right? While Trump defies convention, the liberals are enraged and engaged... and there is plenty of time for more truth to come out or more malfeasance to be played out by McConnell. And if this Nunes thing has wings... it could shatter the House.

It could. But I won't hold my breath. And I don't think it matters how bad the optics objectively are against Trump. I think the US is so politically partisan that Republicans will still find excuses to defend him and his people will vote for him.

Oh, his people will vote for him. They have no honor. The difference is with higher Democrat turnout, Trump can't win WI, MI, or PA.

It remains to be seen if the liberals will turn out in as big numbers where and when it matters.

Liberals vote in higher numbers generally during general elections. The Democrats have turned out yugely in 2018 and 2019.

As Yang keeps saying...

Who?

...and he's absolutely right, you need to focus on what got Trump elected in the first place.

Low democrat turnout and people trading sanity for magic beans in areas where factories shuttered decades ago.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

There were mainstream and non-Nixonian legal experts who disagreed with his impeachment.

But the conditions are very different now. GOP Senators (not all, but nearly) will not vote against Trump if they can find a way to legally justify their vote (even if not with good arguments, but with support from scholars). That's not because they like Trump, but because they do not want to lose their seats, which would likely happen if they vote against him.

I think there are enough Republican senators who would like Trump gone and even removed from office. However, until they are willing to accept the risk to their seat in the Senate, they will continue to act like hypocritical cowards.

But I do not think the "until" will ever happen. They will only vote if the risk is no greater than if they vote to acquit, and for that, much more evidence is needed.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

WUT???
"There was no quid pro quo"
"There may have been a quid pro quo but it's not Trump's idea"
"Okay there WAS a quid pro quo but still not Trump's idea - no first hand evidence."
"Okay, there was a quid pro quo and it was Trump's idea but it's not illegal"
"Okay it might have been illegal but it's not a high crime"
etc etc etc etc

I see this was a misunderstanding. I meant in my posts. Sure in the impeachment there are moving goalposts.

When you say "far stronger", WTF are you talking about??? What would it take?

As I said, I think no non-Trumpian legal experts backing him may be a part of it. But I suspect it's not enough; I would have to see it to tell. At this point, he does not appear to be at risk of removal. But of course, there are some things for which he would be removed (e.g., if he shot someone in the head on TV), so again, I do not know how much evidence would be enough, but some amount would be so - just not the amount of evidence presented so far, but much more.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

There were mainstream and non-Nixonian legal experts who disagreed with his impeachment.

But the conditions are very different now. GOP Senators (not all, but nearly) will not vote against Trump if they can find a way to legally justify their vote (even if not with good arguments, but with support from scholars). That's not because they like Trump, but because they do not want to lose their seats, which would likely happen if they vote against him.

Senate seats are up every six years and are not nearly as volatile as House seats. The GOP doesn't want to vote against Trump en masse in fear of Trump 2020 reprisals.

I think there are enough Republican senators who would like Trump gone and even removed from office. However, until they are willing to accept the risk to their seat in the Senate, they will continue to act like hypocritical cowards.

But I do not think the "until" will ever happen. They will only vote if the risk is no greater than if they vote to acquit, and for that, much more evidence is needed.

Much more evidence? It is in the phone transcript. It couldn't be any more black and white. Now it is appearing that Trump was asking this of Ukraine knowing that there was nothing to investigate.

Ukraine: So, 'bout those missiles.
Trump: Well, I need a favor though.

This isn't about there being not enough evidence, this is about the GOP ignoring it. They certainly aren't encouraging the White House provide witnesses or documentation either. This is simply about blocking an investigation into an abuse of power. And the GOP have their fingers all over the cover up.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

There are no galloping goalposts, just misreadings of my previous posts. Regardless, the point remains that many Democrats and several large media outlets paint a picture of Trump on the brink of being removed.

WTF? Who/what are you watching? I watch some CNN and NBC News as far as mainstream goes, and I absolutely do not see such a 'picture' being painted of FFvC's removal. Impeachment by the House, yeah 98% chance. Removal by the Senate, not very likely, and so says the imagery from the 'mainstream media outlets' that I've seen.

Okay, fair enough, checking again, the big outlets in the US are not saying that.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Whether you want to say bribery, extortion, shakedown, whatever--all these things are add-ons in a sense.

Only if all are voted by the House as articles of impeachment. If, say, the House only votes on bribery, then the Senate can only convict on bribery.

Taking a step back to look at what is there, that requires minimal inferences is this: President Trump asked a foreign government to investigate his opponent.

They will probably say that he did not ask them to make things up, plant evidence, etc., and that there was a public interest to investigate possible corruption. It may not be a good reply, but it's probably good enough for enough senators.

An abuse of power is sufficient as a charge without bribery, extortion, blackmail, because the Constitution says "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors."

Only if the House impeaches on abuse of power.

 

[laughing dog]

There were mainstream and non-Nixonian legal experts who disagreed with his impeachment.

But the conditions are very different now. GOP Senators (not all, but nearly) will not vote against Trump if they can find a way to legally justify their vote (even if not with good arguments, but with support from scholars). That's not because they like Trump, but because they do not want to lose their seats, which would likely happen if they vote against him.

Some of them are not even bothering with legal arguments.
Look at the hypocrite coward Lindsay Graham whose argument now is that Trump is too incompetent to manage a quid pro quo.

But I do not think the "until" will ever happen. They will only vote if the risk is no greater than if they vote to acquit, and for that, much more evidence is needed.

They don't need more evidence - they need more backbone.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Some of them are not even bothering with legal arguments.
Look at the hypocrite coward Lindsay Graham whose argument now is that Trump is too incompetent to manage a quid pro quo.

But I do not think the "until" will ever happen. They will only vote if the risk is no greater than if they vote to acquit, and for that, much more evidence is needed.

They don't need more evidence - they need more backbone.

Or more evidence - enough so that voting to acquit is more dangerous to their seats than voting to convict.

 

[laughing dog]

Some of them are not even bothering with legal arguments.
Look at the hypocrite coward Lindsay Graham whose argument now is that Trump is too incompetent to manage a quid pro quo.

But I do not think the "until" will ever happen. They will only vote if the risk is no greater than if they vote to acquit, and for that, much more evidence is needed.

They don't need more evidence - they need more backbone.

Or more evidence - enough so that voting to acquit is more dangerous to their seats than voting to convict.

You don't understand. More evidence is not going to sway the voters they are afraid of.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Or more evidence - enough so that voting to acquit is more dangerous to their seats than voting to convict.

You don't understand. More evidence is not going to sway the voters they are afraid of.

A lot more evidence might sway away other voters, and they need both.

 

[Angra Mainyu]

But for example, a confession of a crime by Trump would likely be sufficient evidence. Or if there were very conclusive evidence including recordings and testimony by many officials that he asked Ukrainian officials to plant evidence against Biden, or things like that.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

But for example, a confession of a crime by Trump would likely be sufficient evidence. Or if there were very conclusive evidence including recordings and testimony by many officials that he asked Ukrainian officials to plant evidence against Biden, or things like that.

Yes, we understand that additional smoking guns would be helpful... but McConnell also refused to hold hearings or hold a vote on a Supreme Court nominee of Obama's, regardless of what he was supposed to do. Trump was caught red handed, and we've got Louisiana Sen. Kennedy out there proposing conspiracy theories of how Ukraine was involved in the 2016 election meddling (not the Russian meddling but the meddling the DNC was behind but forgot to actually meddle with).

We have the EU Ambassador who gave Trump's inauguration $1,000,000 saying it was a Quid Pro Quo. The remaining people that know the answers to the most critical questions are being told not to cooperate with federally issue subpoenas.