I definitely think it will but the Senate has an apolitical out … they can set the precedent that impeachment does not apply to acts* before the election/inauguration, only to high crimes and misdemeanors during the term of office.
*Assuming such acts did not directly influence the election such as buying off electors or directly ordering the tampering of voting equipment. Indirect influence such as releasing emails or spreading fake news or perjury in a civil case would not be worthy of conviction.
It’s odd to me that we are just accepting the fact that the president can not be indicted for crimes related to obtaining the presidency. Sets up a pretty fucked up incentive system where the reward for cheating to win the presidency is immunity for that cheating.
I’m sure as shit not accepting it. The penalties for fraud, conspiracy etal. should be much, much worse BECAUSE it involves campaigning for political office.
For the very reason that we are seeing now. Once in, their criminality is given power to spread out of control.
There isn’t a shortage of people missing the forest for the trees in recent times.
Similarly, on the side of “Collusion isn’t a crime!”, whether that’s correct or not, do we really want to incentivize candidates to work with and use the full military, financial, and political might of foreign nations - in quid-pro-quo arrangements - to bring to bear on each election?
If we allow a president to profit from his corrupt misdeeds that lead to his illegitimate election to the highest office in the land, and then further avoid removal/penalty because he uses that office as a shield against prosecution, then we contradict the very foundational principle upon which our government as a nation rests: No man is above the law.
Time to test this and get some definitive law on the subject. Even this shitty Supreme Court ought to be able to get it right.
I hope Mueller indicts the shitbird in the Oval Office on at least a couple of charges just to force this issue.
If any other citizen would be indicted for the commission of particular crimes, then the President should be indicted for committing those same crimes.
Nothing in the Constitution implies that this is not the case.
The Framers had every opportunity to include in the Constitution the sentence “A sitting President may not be indicted.” They declined to do so.
That’s right. “Not above the law” is a principle that many Americans on both the right and the left can get behind. Even bully-worshipers are made uneasy by the concept of a President who can openly get away with crimes. They may be conflicted about it, but when push comes to shove they don’t like defending it to their kids.
In my view, indicting this perpetrator is the best first step. Action to impeach or to act on the 25th Amendment would then have political cover (which the timid will require).
Yep. Some think that Pence could be worse. That’s completely immaterial if you believe in the rule of law. We must start somewhere, and then we can begin to move forward.
You don’t stay in a burning house because it’s snowing outside.
Rumors are that the House does not want to impeach because then they will never get anything done. This is the same as a person that stays in an abusive relationship because they are afraid of the consequences.
This is what this is folks. An abusive relationship. And we clearly know who the head abuser is.
So the House squeaks through an impeachment on totally partisan lines. The Senate also votes on partisan lines and nothing happens. Why go through all that and use up the political capital on what is, at the end of the day, a wasted effort? Not to mention handing the deplorables a ready-made motivation issue for 2020 turn out efforts.
I actually like the idea of “when the GOP wants to talk impeachment, we’re all ears” plan. Remember the GOP/Clinton debacle.
Plus pushing for an impeachment (especially one that clearly won’t get anywhere) while the Mueller investigation is still in progress may be counterproductive. If you know that new and significant evidence is likely to be available in the near(-ish) future, there is a benefit to waiting.
Not quite. It’s the same as a person who realizes the abuser’s brother is the police chief, the abuser’s best friend is the town judge, the abuser’s cousin is in charge at the hospital, all of them saying “oh, he’s always been a little rough but he’s a good guy beneath it all” and even if they show up battered and bruised to the state police or FBI with video evidence, there’s an uphill climb to get anything done or get out of the situation.
Getting out of the relationship is a good idea. But the idea that they can “just do <X>” and immediately improve their situation is as apt here as it is in many abusive relationships. Things get complicated and solutions often take time with no obvious progress to outside observers until there is.
Wait until Mueller files indictments, then impeach. See if that will convince SCOTUS that the President can be indicted.
The Senate probably still will not move to impeach, even if SCOTUS rules that the President can be and has been indicted.
What happens if the president is indicted, charged with federal crimes and impeached by the house but not the Senate? He will try to pardon himself, that’s what. Back to SCOTUS.
I was considering starting a thread in GD about the politics of impeachment, but I think the above conversation pretty much covered what I wanted to say.
In a perfect world, both House and Senate would agree whether or not the President’s actions constitute “high crimes and misdemeanors” and act accordingly, without regard to political implications. But we don’t live in a perfect world. In the world we live in, a House vote to impeach along party lines, followed by a Senate acquittal on party lines, would be disastrous for everybody. It would look like “politics as usual”.
I think the House should investigate the hell out of everything Trump has ever touched, throw the Mueller report on top of it, and tell the President they await his resignation.