There may not be 67 votes to remove Trump, BUT...

[edhopper]

what if the House impeached and there is a trial in the Senate and 10 or 12 Republicans vote to remove.
That's short of the 2/3s but a strong majority of 57+.
Hard for Trump and the GOP to claim he is innocent if the majority vote he is guilty.
He will claim it anyway, but it will be a weak argument.
It would be like getting off on a technicality.
And the GOP will have to face voters supporting a "guilty, but not removed" President.


Impeach the Mother Fucker!!

[dem4decades]

1. Moscow Mitch can block the vote, yes?

[TreasonousBastard]

3. I don't think so-- the Constitution says the Senate "will" try the president, not talk about it...

But, he might try some way to game it, anyway.

So far, he says he won't interfere, but that's now, when a conviction seems unlikely.

[tritsofme]

10. The Constitution says: "The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments"

There is no command that the Senate must try every impeachment, just that they have the sole power to do so.

It certainly isn’t beyond McConnell to stretch ambiguity to its limit...

[TreasonousBastard]

15. Point taken.

[SergeStorms]

32. I don't know.....

If Moscow's bitch wants to be re-elected he might want to think about doing something like that. Amy McGrath is stacking up very well against him so far, and something like that would likely bury him in Ol' Kentucky.

[StarfishSaver]

11. The Constitution doesn't require a trial, but Senate rules do

They'd have to vote to change the rules and that would be very difficult in this atmosphere to get away with.

[TreasonousBastard]

16. Another point taken.

[tritsofme]

18. Under current rules the Senate could adopt a motion to dismiss prior to the House offering

any evidence or witnesses, and any trial taking place.

At the very least, it would put them on the record.

[StarfishSaver]

19. True. And under current rules, they can also pass a resolution

that only presidents whose names don't rhyme with rump shall be subjected to a trial after impeachment - but just because they can doesn't mean they will.

[tritsofme]

20. It is almost certain that a trial would have to survive multiple motions to dismiss.

And a majority of senators, including at least four Republicans, would have to bat it down each time.

In Clinton’s trial, Democrats offered motions to dismiss at multiple junctures.

[Orrex]

27. I'd like to rec your reply

[StarfishSaver]

31. :-)

[edhopper]

6. No

don't think he is allowed to.
But he will strong-arm all the Repugs. I just gave a what if because some vunerable GOP Senators could lose their seat by voting in favor of Trump.

[Hoyt]

2. Think it's worth it with latest charges; however, unless it's going to be a conviction, I doubt any

GOPers would put their rear on the line. Even Romney will forget he said anything about the shakedown being extremely troubling, unless he can count on the 2/3rds.

Before, we weren’t even sure Impeachment would pass House. So, go for it and soon.

[TwilightZone]

4. I don't think we'll get 10-12.

My gut says we don't get any, though I'd happily be wrong.

Even one would give it the appearance of bipartisanship. We might get a couple in purple states.

[Awsi Dooger]

34. Your gut is correct...the number would be 0

It is astonishing that anyone here believes otherwise

[TwilightZone]

35. It's a little wishful thinking and a little projection.

Some still expect Republicans to think rationally and see things the way we see them. I just don't see it happening.

I don't blame anyone for believing that Republicans will come around, but that would go against everything they've done for the past decade. Or decades.

[bdamomma]

5. Rasida Tlaib

site might interest you. Look at merchandise


https://www.rashidaforcongress.com

[edhopper]

7. Love it!

she is one of The Squad? Yes?

[bdamomma]

8. Yes she is

and your last comment, she has T shirts saying that!!

[edhopper]

12. I saw that

might need to contribute for one.

[bdamomma]

13. hmm.....

reminds me of V for Vendetta with everyone wearing the masks!!

[Duppers]

37. Love her!

[StarfishSaver]

9. That's my take, as well

And if just a few Republicans vote to remove him - even if it doesn't make a majority - they won't be able to claim it's a Democratic witchhunt.

[beachbumbob]

14. I doubt McConnel will allow a trial to happen

[edhopper]

17. wel...

https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/mcconnell-says-if-house-impeaches-trump-senate-must-have-trial

[rurallib]

21. We thought he would give Garland a hearing also.

In this case I get the feeling that McConnell feels he will have no trouble keeping his troops in line - but that could change.

[beachbumbob]

33. I never thought he would give Garland hearing. Why would he?

Republicans play to win.

It's hard to beat some one ( or party) when they do all they can do to win.

Hope we are learning what it takes

[Cosmocat]

25. I believe it when I see it

Until then Im assuming he pulls a garrick m and says you cant have impeachment proceedings if a POTUS is in a reelection year.

[Captain Zero]

36. Democrats could all go vote for William Weld in the Republican Primaries

In Indiana it is possible. You just request the party ballot you want, they have to give it to you.
It would really only look bad if a person voted in several GOP primaries in a row and then
tied to run for something as a Democrat.
Parties look down on candidates who have been voting in the other primary.

I'm not sure how many states this is possible in, though.

[DENVERPOPS]

28. Amen Montana Mama

Every one seems to be forgetting that a ton of repubs also took large amount of money from the NRA for their campaign booty's. A ton of money that came from Russia, laundered thru the NRA to Republican candidates up and down the line.
The top dogs got millions.....think Oconnel, graham, etc, and a bunch spread on down even to state and other small elections.

They were all complicit, there is no way they will spill the beans because it would incriminate them and they would go down with Trump. Expect an all out war, with no holds barred. They will not give up, now that they are painfully close to pulling off the last of a COUP.......

[Karadeniz]

22. Jeff flake was told that 30 senators would convict if the voting was secret. So make it secret!

If we elect by secret ballot, we should be able to eject by secret ballot!

[INdemo]

23. I think when the Impeachment process reaches the Senate

The streets will be full of protesters Demanding the Conviction of Trump

[marble falls]

24. His whole 2-1/2 years has been a series of weak arguments. Whats another one? ...

The GOP seems to have gotten past the embarrassment of supporting a President who missed winning the popular vote by 3,000,000 votes. I don't think they'll have any trouble supporting an impeached but not convicted President.

I know I had no problems supporting Bill Clinton.

I'm not so certain that in a few more months the Senate would have any problem voting to get rid of Donnie Two Scoops. After all, they'd still have Mike Pence. And so would Donnie when a pardon becomes needed.

[struggle4progress]

26. Let us have the hearings and the evidence before we turn to such questions

The evidence itself will require much careful discussion and consideration

[Blaukraut]

29. I'm starting to think there will be a near unanimous vote to remove him n/t

[subana]

30. Rachel just showed a comment from Jay Sekulow

he said he thinks dems are over reaching & that in the end it will turn out to be nothing.

But if he did nothing wrong, why go to such extremes to keep the phone calls hidden? Innocent people