Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

groundloop

(11,488 posts)
Thu Oct 17, 2019, 11:37 PM Oct 2019

The Senate is likelier to remove Trump after impeachment than you think

I found an interesting article debunking the myth that tRump has guaranteed protection in the Senate. It seems especially pertinent now that people are beginning to lose their fear to testify against tRump, and repub Senators are speaking out against his Turkish debacle.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2019/10/11/senate-is-likelier-remove-trump-after-impeachment-than-you-think/


As the House of Representatives builds momentum to impeach President Trump, conventional wisdom holds that the constitutionally required two-thirds vote in the Senate to remove him would be impossible.

This conventional wisdom is wrong.

While getting rid of the president this way remains far from certain, it’s more likely than most observers will admit. And it’s becoming a stronger possibility day by day as Trump’s foreign policy stumbles remind GOP senators that speaking out against the president doesn’t have to be political suicide.

Historically inclined naysayers cite the acquittals of our only two impeached presidents as support for the argument that Trump won’t be removed. Those examples, both of which ended with the commander in chief beating the charges against him and serving out his full term, on first blush do appear to bolster that case.

<snip>

The wrong lesson, however, can be taken from Johnson’s nonconviction. Senators allowed the president to remain in place partly because they suspected the law that the president had violated to prompt his impeachment, the Tenure of Office Act, itself stood on particularly shaky ground. (It was, in fact, later ruled unconstitutional.) Other articles of impeachment against Johnson included “crimes” like speaking ill of Congress in public — which may very well have contravened a lingering norm from the early days of the republic but fell very well short of warranting immediate ejection from the presidency.

It’s hard to imagine Trump’s forthcoming impeachment resting on such weak foundations. Most likely, articles of impeachment against him will point to core abuses of power, obstruction of justice and failure to comply with lawful congressional subpoenas — and that’s if the House only chooses to highlight misdeeds related to the Ukraine debacle.

<snip>

But it’s worth recalling that Clinton’s acquittal came largely because his violations of law were intended to cover up a personal affair, not a matter of state, and were not seen as a persistent pattern of inherent unfitness. The situation now is quite different. Trump’s actions on the Ukraine scandal alone implicate the constitutional fabric itself, and they build on inappropriate activities described in detail in the scathing Mueller report. This all puts senators tasked with judging Trump in a different place than those who judged Clinton.

<snip>

Not so now. While the GOP has largely embraced Trump’s political program even where it breaks with long-standing party orthodoxy, he has earned little enduring loyalty within the establishment. Republican senators remain loathe to break openly with the president, but former senator Jeff Flake last month candidly assessed that 35 of his former GOP colleagues would vote to remove Trump from office if the poll were taken in private. “Anybody who has sat through two years, as I have, of Republican luncheons,” Flake also said, “realizes that there’s not a lot of love for the president.”

Flake’s point has limited utility; a Senate trial of Trump would not end, of course, with a private vote. His observation nevertheless reveals a core truth: Republican support for Trump is highly instrumental, not fundamental. If the president’s overall approval rating sat above 60 percent (as Bill Clinton’s did during his impeachment trial), or if the majority of the American people opposed impeachment and removal as they did then, or even only if support among Republicans for Trump’s impeachment and removal remained in the single digits, fear of Trump’s tweets would probably keep GOP senators in line.

Polls now tell a different story. Trump’s aggregated approval rating has never escaped the 35 to 45 percent band, keeping it stunningly short of Clinton’s overall numbers. Plus, a new Fox News poll shows 51 percent of respondents support impeaching and removing Trump. And a Washington Post-Schar School poll reveals that 18 percent of Republicans support his impeachment and removal.

In this environment, even the small dose of political courage we’ve seen this week from Republicans on Capitol Hill matters. On the Ukraine affair, at least two GOP senators — Mitt Romney (Utah) and Ben Sasse (Neb.) — publicly expressed concern about the president’s actions. Before Trump’s angry tweets responding to Romney could become a headline story, the president’s decision to expose Kurds in northern Syria to Turkish attacks spurred much wider criticism from Republican senators, including firm Trump ally Lindsey O. Graham (S.C.). Talk is cheap, yes. But coming on the heels of so many instances of GOP senators’ silence in the wake of Trump’s controversies, one can forgive The Post’s Shane Harris for calling it a “Republican rebellion.” Most importantly, the president uncharacteristically refrained from lashing out at those who disagreed with him.

Political momentum has odd properties. When tides turn, they often turn quickly and harshly. While the basic math still points to a Senate acquittal, this week nevertheless brings to mind Winston Churchill’s words after the British victory at El Alamein in 1942: “Now this is not the end. It is not even the beginning of the end. But it is, perhaps, the end of the beginning.”

18 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
The Senate is likelier to remove Trump after impeachment than you think (Original Post) groundloop Oct 2019 OP
Only if one ignores everything they have done to date in his presidency. TwilightZone Oct 2019 #1
I belive that one day tRump will be too toxic for these people to defend any longer. groundloop Oct 2019 #2
I'd like to believe that enough of them have a conscience to do something about Trump. TwilightZone Oct 2019 #6
+1 right down the line stopdiggin Oct 2019 #14
And if ISIS bdamomma Oct 2019 #17
these skunks are not gonna go down for this reptile. mopinko Oct 2019 #3
If trump were impeached and removed from office, would he still be able to run in 2020? Poiuyt Oct 2019 #4
The Senate sets the terms. TwilightZone Oct 2019 #7
That makes sense. Thanks Poiuyt Oct 2019 #8
No, he couldn't run again... Wounded Bear Oct 2019 #11
Not quite. It's up to the Senate. TwilightZone Oct 2019 #12
My fear is Moscow Mitch. lastlib Oct 2019 #5
The G-7 going to Doral should help too. They don't want to be weighed down by such obvious TeamPooka Oct 2019 #9
"naysayers cite the acquittals of our only two impeached presidents as support for the argument" Garrett78 Oct 2019 #10
right. Johnson and Clinton have like ZIP to do with it stopdiggin Oct 2019 #15
Yeah, same gutless wonders looking at their shoes in today's meeting? Arthur_Frain Oct 2019 #13
I'll believe it when I see it. blueinredohio Oct 2019 #16
That's why Democrats do not need to be in a hurry to file Articles of Impeachment. kentuck Oct 2019 #18

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
1. Only if one ignores everything they have done to date in his presidency.
Thu Oct 17, 2019, 11:43 PM
Oct 2019

Sasse is nothing but a grandstander. He talks a big game, then rubber-stamps Trump's agenda.

Romney is still running for president, even when he isn't.

Flake has no credibility. See: Kavanaugh.

I wouldn't put much faith in any of them representing the rest of the GOP.

groundloop

(11,488 posts)
2. I belive that one day tRump will be too toxic for these people to defend any longer.
Thu Oct 17, 2019, 11:51 PM
Oct 2019

The debacle with Turkey and the slaughter of thousands of Kurds may just be the beginning of the end. We shall see.

(I reread what I just posted and kind of feel sick to my stomach talking about all the human pain and suffering as though those people are simply a political football).

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
6. I'd like to believe that enough of them have a conscience to do something about Trump.
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:18 AM
Oct 2019

I just don't see a lot of signs and have zero confidence that even one will do the right thing.

I'd happily be proven wrong.

stopdiggin

(11,095 posts)
14. +1 right down the line
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 04:30 AM
Oct 2019

except that I'd point out we would need something like 12-13? Doesn't happen on an individual basis. There would have to be some kind of coalition or pact ...

And I too .. would dearly love to be proven wrong.

bdamomma

(63,658 posts)
17. And if ISIS
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 01:29 PM
Oct 2019

starts to spread their tentacles in the US while there are babies, and children locked up on the Southern border.

mopinko

(69,809 posts)
3. these skunks are not gonna go down for this reptile.
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:03 AM
Oct 2019

and do not discount the harm that he is doing himself w the military right now. mcraven is the tip of the iceberg.
the worm is turning. hell, spinning.

Poiuyt

(18,087 posts)
4. If trump were impeached and removed from office, would he still be able to run in 2020?
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:14 AM
Oct 2019

Isn't there some clause that says an impeached president is ineligible to hold federal office?

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
7. The Senate sets the terms.
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:20 AM
Oct 2019

In the event of removal, he would likely be declared ineligible. It is not, however, mandatory.

Wounded Bear

(58,440 posts)
11. No, he couldn't run again...
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 01:09 AM
Oct 2019

there is a clause in the Constitution. If impeached and convicted in senate, he would be ineligible for any federal office.

Period. and no parole for impeachment, either.

TwilightZone

(25,342 posts)
12. Not quite. It's up to the Senate.
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 01:18 AM
Oct 2019

" A convicted president can be prohibited from again holding office if the Senate so decides, per Article I Section 3, which includes: “Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.” Disqualification is not automatic, but up to the Senate’s discretion."

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/failed-impeachment-nullify-term/

lastlib

(22,981 posts)
5. My fear is Moscow Mitch.
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:15 AM
Oct 2019

What dirty shit does he have up his sleeve to protect his comrade in crime? I saw somewhere that he met GOPher senators to discuss impeachment, and I can't help but think he's cooking something up, using (or, more likely, twisting) the rules to determine the outcome in GOPee's favor. I just can't put it past him. He has been saying that the Senate has no choice but to hold a trial, but hasn't tipped his hand about procedures or guidelines. What's to stop him from just holding a quick vote on the charges as soon as the House brings them in, and thwart the whole process? I know the Chief Justice is supposed to preside, but I can't help but think he's gonna pull a fast one on us.

TeamPooka

(24,156 posts)
9. The G-7 going to Doral should help too. They don't want to be weighed down by such obvious
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:27 AM
Oct 2019

public corruption in their re-election campaigns

Garrett78

(10,721 posts)
10. "naysayers cite the acquittals of our only two impeached presidents as support for the argument"
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 12:50 AM
Oct 2019

That's certainly not what I cite, and I haven't seen a single person cite those acquittals as reason to believe Trump won't be removed.

The main reason cited seems to be the fact that Cult45 would be pissed off and cause trouble for any Republican (who hopes to remain in office) who turns on Trump. There's also the strong possibility that at least some in the Senate (e.g., Rand Paul) are beholden to Russia just as much as Trump is.

I don't think the acquittals of Johnson and Clinton have, for most "naysayers," anything whatsoever to do with why it's believed conviction is highly unlikely.

Arthur_Frain

(1,784 posts)
13. Yeah, same gutless wonders looking at their shoes in today's meeting?
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 02:39 AM
Oct 2019

Not bloody likely. Anyone who really thinks they will grow some spine or cojones anytime soon is whistling in the dark. The only way he goes is if he’s voted out decisively, and then we have to figure out how to get him out of the White House proper, ‘cause he’s dug in like a tick.

kentuck

(110,950 posts)
18. That's why Democrats do not need to be in a hurry to file Articles of Impeachment.
Fri Oct 18, 2019, 01:33 PM
Oct 2019

So long as they are uncovering information and have Trump and the Republicans on the defensive, they should continue to do what they have been doing.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»The Senate is likelier to...