Guess he needs to make sure 2/3rds of the Senate doesn’t disapprove of his tie color...

Guess he needs to make sure 2/3rds of the Senate doesn’t disapprove of his tie color...

The media is always quick to report in their impeachment coverage that "the Senate is controlled by a Republican majority."  FAKE NEWS!  While technically accurate, it has no bearing on the issue.

There are 50 senators (+ the VP who presides as Senate President who votes when a tie-breaker is needed). 

100 * 2/3 = 67 -- called a "Super Majority".  Thus, 33 votes for acquittal is all that's needed to prevent an impeachment trial from convicting Trump. 

Current party representation in the Senate: 

GOP:  53;
DNC: 45;
Independent: 2. 

Normally Independents caucus with the Dems, so the split is more like 53-47.

If the Dems held 53 seats, and if the Independents voted with them, they'd still need 12 members of the GOP's 45 to flip.  With the flimsy evidence they currently demonstrated in the hearings, that would be 99% unlikely.

In reality, the Dems need 20 Republican Senators to flip -- out of 53.

Math is hard.

Did you even try to read what I posted?  The Senate holds a trial.  The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presides over the trial.  It takes 2/3 of the Senate to convict and remove a President.

You're getting way ahead of the situation asking about SCOTUS getting involved.

"High crime."  The operative word is "CRIME."  Geesh.  How obtuse can one person be?

Posted a whole bunch of history for you on the meaning and application of high crimes and you just ignore it. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. If only you would look at the facts for the truth instead of seeing everything through your confirmation bias. High crimes does not mean crimes.

I mentioned SCOTUS because no other group or agency would even have a chance at overruling Congress. If congress voted to impeach and convicted in a trial to remove the president for wearing the wrong color tie, who do you think people would try to turn to to fight it? SCOTUS!

Posted a whole bunch of history for you on the meaning and application of high crimes and you just ignore it. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink. If only you would look at the facts for the truth instead of seeing everything through your confirmation bias. High crimes does not mean crimes.

I mentioned SCOTUS because no other group or agency would even have a chance at overruling Congress. If congress voted to impeach and convicted in a trial to remove the president for wearing the wrong color tie, who do you think people would try to turn to to fight it? SCOTUS!

No.  I don't ignore relevant facts.  I just ignore YOU.

SCOTUS can't overturn a conviction for impeachment unless there's a Constitutional reason the conviction was invalid.  I don't think the Senate will get 2/3rds of their body without making damn sure it'll hold up to that scrutiny.

Just because the House can play fast and loose with the articles of impeachment and get Trump on "stuff they don't like", the voting public isn't going to let them get away with it.

Whatever they do to Trump, they better be willing to have it done to the next Dem in the Oval Office.  Precedence is a bitch.  Just ask Harry Reid how that nuclear option worked now that McConnell uses it to push Trump's nominees through for a vote in spite of Dems trying to obstruct the process.

No.  I don't ignore relevant facts.  I just ignore YOU.

SCOTUS can't overturn a conviction for impeachment unless there's a Constitutional reason the conviction was invalid.  I don't think the Senate will get 2/3rds of their body without making damn sure it'll hold up to that scrutiny.

Just because the House can play fast and loose with the articles of impeachment and get Trump on "stuff they don't like", the voting public isn't going to let them get away with it.

Whatever they do to Trump, they better be willing to have it done to the next Dem in the Oval Office.  Precedence is a bitch.  Just ask Harry Reid how that nuclear option worked now that McConnell uses it to push Trump's nominees through for a vote in spite of Dems trying to obstruct the process.

No, they probably won't get 2/3rds of the senate but that is irrelevant to whether they can impeach Trump for whatever they want. I never claimed they will successfully removed the president, I only stated it doesn't matter whether they prove an actual criminal action.

You did ignore the facts I posted when you simply claimed your common sense definition was more accurate than 400 years of history and precedent. And you clearly didn't ignore me either.

But who cares, if they remove Trump we will get Pence anyway and he seems quite capable of the job.

But who cares, if they remove Trump we will get Pence anyway and he seems quite capable of the job.

That right there. IMO you’re completely missing the point of the push for impeachment proceedings against Trump. Consider the timing of this all...

That right there. IMO you’re completely missing the point of the push for impeachment proceedings against Trump. Consider the timing of this all...

"The best defense is a good offense."

The Dems have been very offensive the last 3 years.   

That right there. IMO you’re completely missing the point of the push for impeachment proceedings against Trump. Consider the timing of this all...

When it comes to the timing it is a lose lose situation. If they do it quickly then republicans will claim it is rushed and not proper. If they do it slowly it will get closer and closer to the election time then the republicans will claim democrats are drawing it out to affect the election.

Trump will be the only pres ivestigated daily and never charged. Then attempted impeached for nothing and win reelection.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

Trump will be the only pres ivestigated daily and never charged. Then attempted impeached for nothing and win reelection.

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

On the other hand if he loses re-election then would you have wished for the impeachment so that Pence could have run and maybe won?

Considering nearly half the country supports impeachment I am not confident Trump will win. Polls have Americans supporting impeachment at 47-50 percent.


On a side note, the same poll showed that most Americans think they won't change their minds regardless of what the hearings find. So much for keeping an open mind and changing one's position to account for new information...
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/19/780540637/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-say-impeachment-hearings-wont-change-their-minds

On the other hand if he loses re-election then would you have wished for the impeachment so that Pence could have run and maybe won?

Considering nearly half the country supports impeachment I am not confident Trump will win. Polls have Americans supporting impeachment at 47-50 percent.


On a side note, the same poll showed that most Americans think they won't change their minds regardless of what the hearings find. So much for keeping an open mind and changing one's position to account for new information...
https://www.npr.org/2019/11/19/780540637/poll-americans-overwhelmingly-say-impeachment-hearings-wont-change-their-minds

WRONG!

Majority of voters now oppose impeachment: Quinnipiac poll

Majority of voters now OPPOSE IMPEACHMENT.  So, if Republicans have no reason to change their minds (which was can assume they have not done), and Independents who were once in favor of impeachment have already flipped (based on recent polls compared to 3 months ago), and now even MORE voters oppose impeachment, who are these voters who changed their minds?

The answer is DEMOCRATS.  Even Dem voters are tired of the lies and exclusive "Orange Man Bad" agenda of the House.

Quinnipiac found 51% of registered voters surveyed said they don’t want to see the president ousted through impeachment.
That’s the first time the number has been above 50% since before Speaker Nancy Pelosi announced an impeachment inquiry
in late September.

Another 45% do want to see the president impeached and forced out.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/10/majority-voters-now-oppose-impeachment-quinnipiac-/

I had a conversation that was a shape shifter.   That's when you discuss 1 topic and it merges to another.  So she asked about guns, guess her building is not as safe either.  Then moved on to who made the gun laws, then finally on to Trump, who owns the fed, etc...

She had no idea why Trump should be impeached, but that she hates him.  She is a dem, but becoming pro 2a due to all the crime increasing.

I showed her a little of the red bill.  Discussed who owns the fed reserve, the media, you know tinfoil stuff.

WRONG!

Majority of voters now oppose impeachment: Quinnipiac poll

Majority of voters now OPPOSE IMPEACHMENT.  So, if Republicans have no reason to change their minds (which was can assume they have not done), and Independents who were once in favor of impeachment have already flipped (based on recent polls compared to 3 months ago), and now even MORE voters oppose impeachment, who are these voters who changed their minds?

The answer is DEMOCRATS.  Even Dem voters are tired of the lies and exclusive "Orange Man Bad" agenda of the House.

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/10/majority-voters-now-oppose-impeachment-quinnipiac-/

So what, a sway of a couple percent on impeachment is hardly a sign of whether he can win re-election.

So what, a sway of a couple percent on impeachment is hardly a sign of whether he can win re-election.

LOL!  You can't stand to be proven wrong.

One would think you'd be used to it by now.


MORE PEOPLE THINK DONALD TRUMP WILL WIN
2020 ELECTION OVER DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE,
POLL SHOWS

Despite the ongoing impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump, more voters think
he would win the 2020 general election over an unnamed Democratic nominee.

https://www.newsweek.com/poll-trump-will-win-2020-election-over-democratic-nominee-1468952

LOL!  You can't stand to be proven wrong.

One would think you'd be used to it by now.


MORE PEOPLE THINK DONALD TRUMP WILL WIN
2020 ELECTION OVER DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE,
POLL SHOWS

https://www.newsweek.com/poll-trump-will-win-2020-election-over-democratic-nominee-1468952

You didn't prove me wrong, what a joke. I quoted poll numbers that were real, all you did is show new poll numbers have moved a little.

 Meanwhile you insisted a president couldn't be impeached for something that wasn't a crime and when I decimated you with facts you changed the subject and try to find empty victories wherever you can.

You also failed to support any argument that a small change in poll numbers on impeachment would have a significant impact on the election so still waiting...

You didn't prove me wrong, what a joke. I quoted poll numbers that were real, all you did is show new poll numbers have moved a little.

 Meanwhile you insisted a president couldn't be impeached for something that wasn't a crime and when I decimated you with facts you changed the subject and try to find empty victories wherever you can.

You also failed to support any argument that a small change in poll numbers on impeachment would have a significant impact on the election so still waiting...

Trump has NOT been impeached yet.

Please try to keep up.

Until Pelosi transmits the articles of impeachment to the Senate via her selected House Managers, the process has stalled. 

Logically, if Trump were actually impeached, the Senate, according to the Constitution, has 30 days in which to take up the matter and hold a trial.

Right now, that clock hasn't started.  Ergo, Trump is not impeached -- yet. 

If a grand jury votes to indict a suspect, but the prosecutor never files charges with the court, was the suspect ever charged?  If so, there would be a trail -- and a speedy one at that -- required to hear the case.

Same thing here.  Pelosi is abusing her power, substituting her prerogative over that of the entire House that voted on the articles.

This might all be mute when she returns from holiday break and transmits the articles to the Senate amid the fallout from holding onto them.

I think she's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.   

Trump has NOT been impeached yet.
Please try to keep up.

Straw Man. I never said he had been impeached though many agree he already has been.

Until Pelosi transmits the articles of impeachment to the Senate via her selected House Managers, the process has stalled. 
Logically, if Trump were actually impeached, the Senate, according to the Constitution, has 30 days in which to take up the matter and hold a trial.
Right now, that clock hasn't started.  Ergo, Trump is not impeached -- yet. 
If a grand jury votes to indict a suspect, but the prosecutor never files charges with the court, was the suspect ever charged?  If so, there would be a trail -- and a speedy one at that -- required to hear the case.
Same thing here.  Pelosi is abusing her power, substituting her prerogative over that of the entire House that voted on the articles.
This might all be mute when she returns from holiday break and transmits the articles to the Senate amid the fallout from holding onto them.
I think she's damned if she does and damned if she doesn't.   

Certainly debatable. Many experts seem to disagree on the matter.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/20/yes-donald-trump-has-been-impeached/

Certainly debatable. Many experts seem to disagree on the matter.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/20/yes-donald-trump-has-been-impeached/

I see two experts cited in that article you posted
I fail to see how that constitutes "many"

Straw Man. I never said he had been impeached though many agree he already has been.


Certainly debatable. Many experts seem to disagree on the matter.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/12/20/yes-donald-trump-has-been-impeached/

The experts you cite are giving opinions, not fact.

The fact is, the HOUSE has impeached Trump, not "CONGRESS".  The Senate has to have their say.  Until the Senate is offered a chance to hold a trial, the impeachment is just a do-nothing resolution.

According to your experts' opinion, any bill the House passes is a law ready to be signed by the President, yet the Senate still must vote before it's a law.

Saw a discussion today that brings up a very good point:

1.  House passed the articles of impeachment

2.  Pelosi is holding onto the articles until the Senate agrees to the Dem's demands on how the trial will be run

So,

A.  if the President is actually impeached right now, the Senate could not be held hostage over the trial rules.  The Senate has the SOLE POWER to try impeachment. cases  Therefore, if Trump were actually impeached, the Senate would have a DUTY to schedule the trial within 30 days according to the Constitution.  They could do that today without the House transmitting the articles.  But, since we know they can't do that yet, it means Trump has not been impeached.

B.  Pelosi is supposed to select house managers, or basically prosecutors, to deliver the impeachment articles to the Senate and to present the House's case at trial.  There can be no trial without the managers, just like there can be no criminal trial if the prosecution fails to show up.

Bottom line:  Trump has not been formally impeached right mow,