Politics: The Trump Impeachment Thread

TexasBama

Hall of Fame
Jan 15, 2000
11,361
2,925
273
62
Houston, Texas USA
I'm seeing a couple of articles and statements come out that there is some dissension in the Republican Senate ranks. The gist is that Republican Senators hate Trump, but also fear him, and that if he is impeached, they will keep quiet up to the point of the vote, when they vote to remove. It would take 20 to do that.

It's kind of like trying to overthrow a medieval King. If you try it, you'd better be dang sure you can remove him. Because if you try but don't succeed, revenge will be public and extremely painful.

Trump is such a buffoon that he has to be embarrassing Republican Senate leadership and rank and file Senators. But he's also such a vindictive person that any hint of that ahead of time is putting a noose around your own neck. So the idea kind of passes the smell test. But it's early, sources are still sketchy, and that sort of thing has never happened before. Still, a lot of stuff over the past couple of years has never happened before.

So a couple of questions for the board: Do you think that might happen? If so, who would get the Republican nomination?

My personal thoughts: I hope it does, but don't think it will. It would require coordinating too many votes -- at least 20 -- while keeping an airtight lid on the plan. Just too many people involved to maintain secrecy. But if they somehow pull it off, the nomination goes to Romney because he has anti-Trump bona fides. Whereas Pence would have the Oval Office, but too much Trump stank on him.
John Cornyn and Trump are joined at the hip. Not so sure about Cruz in the long term.
 

TIDE-HSV

Senior Administrator
Staff member
Oct 13, 1999
69,190
6,893
423
Huntsville, AL,USA
I'm seeing a couple of articles and statements come out that there is some dissension in the Republican Senate ranks. The gist is that Republican Senators hate Trump, but also fear him, and that if he is impeached, they will keep quiet up to the point of the vote, when they vote to remove. It would take 20 to do that.

It's kind of like trying to overthrow a medieval King. If you try it, you'd better be dang sure you can remove him. Because if you try but don't succeed, revenge will be public and extremely painful.

Trump is such a buffoon that he has to be embarrassing Republican Senate leadership and rank and file Senators. But he's also such a vindictive person that any hint of that ahead of time is putting a noose around your own neck. So the idea kind of passes the smell test. But it's early, sources are still sketchy, and that sort of thing has never happened before. Still, a lot of stuff over the past couple of years has never happened before.

So a couple of questions for the board: Do you think that might happen? If so, who would get the Republican nomination?

My personal thoughts: I hope it does, but don't think it will. It would require coordinating too many votes -- at least 20 -- while keeping an airtight lid on the plan. Just too many people involved to maintain secrecy. But if they somehow pull it off, the nomination goes to Romney because he has anti-Trump bona fides. Whereas Pence would have the Oval Office, but too much Trump stank on him.
That's a good angle. It might come down to who votes early and how they vote and they vote in alphabetical order. The Senate is sort of front-loaded with Democrats alphabetically, in the first three letters. Cruz is high on the list of Republicans. The vote is, IIRC, of members present. IOW, Republicans opting not to be present are, in effect, voting to remove from office, without having to go on record. If some of those early in the alphabet, particularly Cruz, are absent, it will be very interesting...
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
8,537
704
128
That's a good angle. It might come down to who votes early and how they vote and they vote in alphabetical order. The Senate is sort of front-loaded with Democrats alphabetically, in the first three letters. Cruz is high on the list of Republicans. The vote is, IIRC, of members present. IOW, Republicans opting not to be present are, in effect, voting to remove from office, without having to go on record. If some of those early in the alphabet, particularly Cruz, are absent, it will be very interesting...
That approach would be in character. Passively vote to kill the king by not showing up to vote. Plenty of wiggle room there to muddy things to keep their base confused.
 

chanson78

All-American
Nov 1, 2005
2,586
808
123
43
Huntsville, AL
That's a good angle. It might come down to who votes early and how they vote and they vote in alphabetical order. The Senate is sort of front-loaded with Democrats alphabetically, in the first three letters. Cruz is high on the list of Republicans. The vote is, IIRC, of members present. IOW, Republicans opting not to be present are, in effect, voting to remove from office, without having to go on record. If some of those early in the alphabet, particularly Cruz, are absent, it will be very interesting...
I long thought we were going to have to wait until after primary season before you heard anything out of the Republicans in the Senate. Now, I am not sure they can drag this out until the primaries are over so I think your line of thought has some serious merit.

People were asking who the Republicans put up in place of Trump if he is booted. I think Nikki Haley is/has been positioning herself to step in for a run. If you look at Twitter, she has stayed away from directly contradicting the president, but she appeared forceful and to have leadership qualities while in her post at the UN. She is one that I could think the RNC would gladly say "See we can be progressive too, here is a female candidate we support! We aren't all that bad."
 

Go Bama

Hall of Fame
Dec 6, 2009
7,839
1,863
173
Thirteenessee
Congress is not in session a lot between now and the end of the year. This will kill the momentum of the impeachment proceedings.

October

[FONT=&quot]Week 1[/FONT]

  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
[FONT=&quot]Week 2[/FONT]

  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
[FONT=&quot]Week 3[/FONT]

  • Senate: October 15-18
  • House: October 15-18
[FONT=&quot]Week 4[/FONT]

  • Senate: October 21-25
  • House: October 21-24
[FONT=&quot]Week 5[/FONT]

  • Senate: October 28-November 1
  • House: October 28-31

November

[FONT=&quot]Week 1[/FONT]

  • Senate: November 4-8
  • House: Not in session
[FONT=&quot]Week 2[/FONT]

  • Senate: November 12-15
  • House: November 12-15
[FONT=&quot]Week 3[/FONT]

  • Senate: November 18-22
  • House: November 18-21
[FONT=&quot]Week 4[/FONT]

  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session

December

[FONT=&quot]Week 1[/FONT]

  • Senate: December 2-6
  • House: December 3-6
[FONT=&quot]Week 2[/FONT]

  • Senate: December 9-13
  • House: December 9-12
[FONT=&quot]Week 3[/FONT]

  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
[FONT=&quot]Week 4[/FONT]

  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
[FONT=&quot]Week 5[/FONT]

  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Nov 8, 2004
5,498
1,227
228
Tuscaloosa
That's a good angle. It might come down to who votes early and how they vote and they vote in alphabetical order. The Senate is sort of front-loaded with Democrats alphabetically, in the first three letters. Cruz is high on the list of Republicans. The vote is, IIRC, of members present. IOW, Republicans opting not to be present are, in effect, voting to remove from office, without having to go on record. If some of those early in the alphabet, particularly Cruz, are absent, it will be very interesting...
Excellent point on the requirement of 2/3 of members present, not 2/3 of the whole Senate. I hadn't considered that.

It would take 30 absent Republicans for the 47 Democrats to constitute 2/3. I don't think that's realistic. But it's a sliding scale, and lots of combinations of flips and no-shows would get you there.

For example, if 10 Republicans flip, and another 15 just don't show, that's 57 of 85, and he's out (assuming of course that all 47 Dems vote to remove). Something like that might be achievable.

Afterthought: I like chanson78's idea about Nikki Haley. I think she would work for a lot of reasons.
 
Last edited:

92tide

TideFans Legend
May 9, 2000
41,133
6,841
273
50
East Point, Ga, USA
Congress is not in session a lot between now and the end of the year. This will kill the momentum of the impeachment proceedings.

October

[FONT="][U]Week 1[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: Not in session
[*]House: Not in session
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 2[/FONT]


  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
[FONT="][U]Week 3[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: October 15-18
[*]House: October 15-18
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 4[/FONT]


  • Senate: October 21-25
  • House: October 21-24
[FONT="][U]Week 5[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: October 28-November 1
[*]House: October 28-31
[/LIST]
[h=3]November[/h][COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 1[/FONT]


  • Senate: November 4-8
  • House: Not in session
[FONT="][U]Week 2[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: November 12-15
[*]House: November 12-15
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 3[/FONT]


  • Senate: November 18-22
  • House: November 18-21
[FONT="][U]Week 4[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: Not in session
[*]House: Not in session
[/LIST]
[h=3]December[/h][COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 1[/FONT]


  • Senate: December 2-6
  • House: December 3-6
[FONT="][U]Week 2[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: December 9-13
[*]House: December 9-12
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 3[/FONT]


  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
[FONT="][U]Week 4[/U][/FONT][/COLOR]

[LIST]
[*]Senate: Not in session
[*]House: Not in session
[/LIST]
[COLOR=#333333][FONT="]Week 5[/FONT]


  • Senate: Not in session
  • House: Not in session
but there is plenty of time and room for the admin's continued own-goals to keep it fresh in the news
 

Chukker Veteran

Hall of Fame
Feb 6, 2001
8,537
704
128
Afterthought: I like chanson78's idea about Nikki Haley. I think she would work for a lot of reasons.
Our own Condoleezza Rice has been keeping a low profile, but might fit the bill if they need to go that route. Maybe we will get lucky and she will continue to avoid public scrutiny, and we are spared that travesty.
 

bobstod

All-American
Oct 13, 1999
2,279
4
48
79
Magnolia Springs, AL. USA
I'm not well-versed enough to put all the chronology together, but it seems to me that there were a LOT of people fired after the WH knew that this whistleblower's complaint was in the works. The Acting DNI was in place about two weeks when it crossed his desk. Was Bolton fired because of this? Dan Coats? I admit i'm airing suspicions without proof, but I have a feeling that this is going to unravel much like Watergate, but a a much faster pace.
 

Latest threads

TideFansStore.com - Get your gear!

Purchases made through our TideFansStore.com link may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.