Trump Impeachment Trial: Live Steam, Open Thread, Running Commentary

Avatar

Andrew Donaldson

Born and raised in West Virginia, Andrew has since lived and traveled around the world several times over. Though frequently writing about politics out of a sense of duty and love of country, most of the time he would prefer discussions on history, culture, occasionally nerding on aviation, and his amateur foodie tendencies. He can usually be found misspelling/misusing words on Twitter @four4thefire and his writing website Yonder and Home.

Related Post Roulette

14 Responses

  1. Avatar Slade the Leveller
    Ignored
    says:

    The prosecution has an excellent video editor.Report

  2. Avatar Jaybird
    Ignored
    says:

    Seems pretty cut and dried.

    This will be an interesting test for the Republican leadership… how much hold does Mitch have over his minority anymore? (Hell… which way will he direct them to vote?)Report

    • Avatar Stillwater in reply to Jaybird
      Ignored
      says:

      McConnell’s decision will hinge on current intel regarding corporate cash.Report

      • Avatar Philip H in reply to Stillwater
        Ignored
        says:

        I really believe that if Schumer allowed them to vote secret ballot he’d get to his 17 needed to convict. That said, if big donor money wants Trump done in, McConnell may well convict anyway. He has 4 retirees he can get to vote that way since they don’t have to stand, and Mitt Romney will surely do so. Which means he only needs 12 more (and I bet he could find them among the just reelected crowd).Report

        • Avatar DavidTC in reply to Philip H
          Ignored
          says:

          I think the secret ballot idea is interesting, and I honestly don’t understand why that isn’t being offered here.

          Republicans have literally said they don’t feel physically safe voting to convict, it’s perfectly justified.Report

          • Avatar Michael Cain in reply to DavidTC
            Ignored
            says:

            The roll call requirement is in the standing rules for impeachment proceedings. If I understand the twists and turns properly, those rules can be changed by a simple majority. Or at least, the presiding officer’s interpretation of the rules — ie, that a roll call vote is required — can be ruled incorrect by a simple majority. I suppose it comes down to whether Schumer thinks there’s more benefit from making the Republicans go on record after the so-far miserable defense than having a secret ballot and not knowing the outcome in advance.Report

  3. Avatar Philip H
    Ignored
    says:

    I’m no lawyer, and I didn’t stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, but if the parts of the article or not severable, I can’t imagine the penalties are severable either. Trump may have been Constitutionally removed but he is not yet Barred from serving, which seems, using the Reasonable and Prudent Person Test, to indicate there is jurisdiction here.

    But I’m just an oceanographer . . .Report

  4. Avatar DavidTC
    Ignored
    says:

    Given that the Constitution permits the Senate to impose the penalty of permanent disqualification only on former officeholders, it defies logic to suggest that the Senate is prohibited from trying and convicting former officeholders.

    You know, I hadn’t actually thought about this point before.

    If the Senate convicts a president, that president is removed from office at that moment. It’s instantaneous, as far as I can tell. As soon as that vote is tallied, the conviction has happened and the president is removed.

    And then the vote to bar them from future office happens.

    Aka, by definition, all ‘barring from office’ are done on former presidents (Even if they are former president by ten seconds.), and hence it’s exceedingly silly to assert that the process doesn’t allow them to do it to a former president.Report

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *