But, damn, I thought it was us Lutherans who were ‘sombre’… I was really counting on you agnostics to pick me up in a convertible, hand me a mojito, take me to the beach and teach me to dance!
It’s irrelevant if he;s majority leader. The standard for conviction in the Senate isn’t a majority, it’s two thirds. 34 GOP senators is all they need.
I think the issue is that McConnell, if he were still majority leader, might be able to prevent a vote from coming to the Senate floor. (I don’t know this for certain with regards to an impeachment vote, but I believe that he’s blocked bills from doing so.)
Mitch McConnell can stop the vote from ever taking place regardless of the presiding Chief Justice. The only way that changes is if McConnell is no longer majority leader, and that is unlikely even give the most optimistic outcome of the midterm elections. Removal is manifestly unlikely without a sudden and inexplicable reveral of public opinion which would encourage the GOP that abandoning Trump em masse wouldn’t have electorial repercussions.
The laws on campaign contributions don’t encompass things like foreigners throwing their own pro-X rally on American soil or on American airwaves and websites.
The central crime that the troll farms are being prosecuted for is this:
No, I believe that once the House votes to impeach, the Senate immediately ceases all other business and the Chief Justice will have control of the chamber and conduct the trial. I don’t believe the Senate can refuse to vote, for this purpose they can be considered as jurors and not legislators.
I was thinking that as well, but what if enough Senators simply refuse to vote? I suppose that results in a “not guilty” verdict, but it’s still a situation where Senators simply say “We don’t have to vote”.
This is not true. The Chief Justice has the authority to force the Senate to convene during a trial but the Senate has to draft and vote on a resolution which sets up the procedural rules for the trial, as the only rule in the Constitution is the two-thirds majority vote. The Republican majority could stall the process simply by refusing to vote for the resolution. This would forestall the process indefinitely.
The dream that Trump would be removed by the Senate, even if impeached, is just that; a fantasy. Even if the Democrats won a majority in tue Senate they would not have the votes for removal, and the entire charade would be an exercise in partisanship. The only realistic way that Trump is removed before the end of his term is through death or removal under the 25th Amendment due to incapacitation. Political removal via impeachment is essentially impossible without the GOP doing a massive turn step that they’ve shown no willingness to do this far.
They would have to fear that NOT throwing him out was politically disadvantageous as compared to throwing him out. A high bar, to be sure, but not impossible. Even so, in that case I think they’d pull a Nixon and get him to resign rather than get kicked out.
True, that, but I’ve given up on trying to guess where the threshold of tolerance of the absurd is for the GOP even without factoring in the Freedom Caucus and Senate Conservative Fund. I had expected McConnell and Paul Ryan (who was never an enthusiastic supporter of Trump) to turn against Trump once the president started undermining their respective agendas and the most that has happened is that McConnell has offered some lukewarm criticism and Ryan has tucked tail and run ilke a wimpering puppy. I’m actually a little suprised Trump hasn’t concocted a reason to resign as he’s clearly unhappy in a role that he thought would carry far more plenary authority than the chief executive actually has but there is no actual signs of Trump searching for a face-saving exit. Still, I would expect Trump to resign before facing impeachment simply because for all of the talk about his “counterpunching” persona and his bombast about how he would run into gunfire he has displayed gutless pusillanimity whenever challenged directly, preferring to hide behind his press flacks and spastic tweets. Actually having to face off in front of Congress would not suit his delicate, infantile temperment.
I mean, Christ on a cracker, Trump’s only accomplishments have been Gorsuch (which required re-writing Senate rules to do so) and tax cuts (which Republicans will vote yes on without caring what’s in the bill)… and aside from that, Trump has just sown discord within the party on health care, immigration, and spending. But who are Republicans turning against? The Speaker who tried to chart a half-way coherent course through all this storm. Makes perfect sense.
True, but that’s also leverage for a prosecutor. Mueller, and New York State, could *very *privately offer him some non-criminal wrist slap and sealing of evidence on condition of his resignation, and threaten something a whole lot worse if he refuses.
I don’t think that’s how Mueller rolls. There’s no way he and the entire DOJ/FBI will countenance the breadth and depth of this criminal behavior and accept a wrist slap.
Nor should they. This is the most corrupt, criminal political operation in our history. If punishment is not imposed for this crowd, why bother having a criminal justice system at all?
No, I interpret this to mean that a foreign national cannot contribute directly to a campaign, but it can spend money as along it is not a coordinated effort with the campaign.
"The foreign national ban “does not restrain foreign nationals from speaking out about issues or spending money to advocate their views about issues. “” I don’t see how you can allow this and not allow directly supporting a particular candidate. If one advocates for building a wall, you are de facto advocating for one of the candidates.
“or spending money in order to expressly advocate for or against the election of a candidate.” - You seem to have missed the last sentence of what you bolded. Anti Hillary or pro Trump memes are expressly advocating against and for the election of a candidate.
Have you thought about the future consequences of making the interference in this last election the norm? What are you going to say when the Democrats get all these globalists all over the world that the right keeps railing about to start doing the same things the Russians did for Trump? You do realize there are far more places in the world that align more closely with the US Democrats than align with the GOP, right? Do you really think opening this can of worms will be good for your side going forward?