If the House impeached him again....?

[kentuck]

And held up the Articles of Impeachment until after the Election, what would be the impact?

What if the Democrats take the Senate but Trump keeps the White House?

Could that be leverage for the Democrats?

I understand that is a lot of "what ifs" but it is not impossible.

Is that too "hard ball" for the Democrats?

[regnaD kciN]

1. Seems like cheap theatrics...

Remember, even if we retake the Senate, conviction there requires 67 votes, not just a majority. And we couldn’t get to 67 seats even if we won every single Senate race in November, including those of long-term incumbents in deep-red states. All it would do is make us look like we’re grasping at straws, and might ever swing one or two crucial races to the Republicans.

[TwilightZone]

2. What would be the point?

We need 67 votes to remove. Not happening.

Trump didn't care that he was impeached the first time, why would he care a second? If anything, it gave him even more confidence to do whatever he wanted.

[kentuck]

4. What would be the point?

The point would be a "real trial", unlike when Mitch and the Repubs were in charge. The American people deserve to have a full airing of all the charges against Donald Trump and his accomplices.

Whether or not he is convicted is not the primary motive. The people need to know the truth and not have it swept under the rug and dismissed.

[DemsIn2020]

3. Horrible idea.

Some independents may go to Trump not liking how we are impeaching so close to the election.

[Mike 03]

6. That is a risk.

[Mike 03]

5. Is the idea behind this theory, which I've seen floated, to lock up the Senate?

I know we can't win a removal, but the rationale is intriguing. We occupy the Senate for as many of the next three months as possible. Is it essentially a stalling tactic?

There is also a maneuver the Dem senators can use to delay any proceedings for a week. It's not much but it's something--it would make it very difficult to confirm a SC Justice before Election Day.

McConnell would do this to us if the situation was reversed. They got where they are by playing merciless hardball.

[kentuck]

8. I do not think it would lose many votes at all.

If the Democrats take back the Senate and Trump steals the White House again, it would be an insurance policy.

It would protect the rule of law.

Nobody wants to go thru 4 more years of Donald Trump.

[Statistical]

9. How would it be an insurance policy?

If Trump win re-election Democrats could just impeach him next term. If he doesn't then there is no need for anyone to impeach him this term.

Still not seeing what this would accomplish beyond a dumb stunt that would allow Republicans to point to as a reason to vote Democrats out of office.

[kentuck]

12. Just as in last impeachment...

Nancy could take a vote in Democratic Caucus to see if she has the votes. Republicans would scream, just as before, that they should be included in any votes for impeachment. Nancy has the vote in her pocket to use whenever she felt was the right time?

If Donald and the lame-duck Senate attempted to push through a Supreme Court Justice between now and Inauguration Day, Nancy could pull the trigger if she has a Democratic Senate behind her? They could call witnesses. They could expose the facts that have been hidden by Trump and McConnell and their accomplices. Let the Republicans vote to acquit, once the facts are on the table. It may not be so easy the next time?

It would be a shot over the bow of the dictator wannabe.

[Statistical]

13. The minority party in the Senate has no control over the agenda.

Moscow Mitch would simply ignore the House and confirm a justice and then let the lame duck session end.

Win the Presidency. Win the Senate. Now we have power to enact change and can threaten Mitch that if he replaces RBG Biden will get two new seats after inauguration day.

[kentuck]

14. You miss the point.

The Democrats would have no use to impeach unless they take the Senate. It would not be necessary if Democrats win both Senate and White House and keep the House.

"Lame ducks" have been defeated. They will hang around until January 3rd to clean out their desks and it would not be legitimate vote for them to try and put in another Justice. It would be a clear indication that they have politicized the Court to the point where the Democrats would have no choice but to correct their political mistakes by expanding the Court to make it more fair and equitable in the eyes of the American people.

[Statistical]

17. Not sure where you get that idea from.

The lame ducks WILL vote to confirm Trump's nominee. That is what is going to happen.

There is no law which prevent lame ducks from voting. They can vote on any vote called prior to the end of the Senate session.

If the Democrats retake the Senate they won't have the majority until Jan 3rd. 17 days later Trump is leaving office anyways. You really think they are going to do an impeachment trial in the Senate between Jan 3rd and 20th? Nobody is going to do that. There would be no point to do that.

As for expanding the court .... THAT IS THE USEFUL THREAT! Not some we will re-impeach the President in the lame duck session even though the Senate will refuse to call witnesses or convict.

[kentuck]

18. The lame ducks might do as you say?

But that would give the new Democratic majority the justification to expand the Judiciary to correct the politicalzation of the Courts.

[Statistical]

20. I agree. However a threat of a second impeachment does nothing.

The real threat is .... if you confirm this nominee and we will expand the court once the new President and Senate are seated in Janurary.

Regardless I think they will do it no matter what. That is Moscow Mitch's style. He will take the win today even if it comes with risk in the future.

[kentuck]

21. I do not think it is an easy vote for several Senators.

Lame ducks should not be voting for Supreme Court Justices, in my opinion. They have been defeated.

[Mike 03]

10. Yes. When I think about what the GOP has accomplished over the last thirty years

it really makes me think about all the times we have said, "We can't do that, we shouldn't do this..." Maybe if we did some of these things, we wouldn't be in the incredible, almost inconceivable mess we're in.

I'm sad and ashamed to say that the GOP is better at playing the long game. They have patience and cunning that has paid off big time. It's really... I don't have the words.

[lsewpershad]

7. Guess we all feel hopeless

How is it the cons can do much shit and the dems??? Finding all the reasons "it" can't be done.

[Demsrule86]

11. No point...first of all they are going to use this issue to try and win the election...

and put someone on the court after the election. We need to win in November or the large woman will sing for our side.

[kentuck]

15. Yes, I think that is their plan but...

I don't think it will work. Voters are not going to flock to Donald Trump. The cake has been baked, as some have noted. I don't know if it will help any of the Senators in tight races?

The idea of impeachment is to protect our Constitution and the rule of law. It is important that the facts and the truth be put forth to the American people.

[gulliver]

16. If we win, we can impeach him again right away.

And we should. It won't stop his nominee from being confirmed by the Senate though. That seat is gone.

[kentuck]

19. It would justify expanding the Court.

If they pull that trick.