# Impeachment proceedings...will they happen? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [April 19, 2019, 11:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795 "2019-04-19T23:08:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 19
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 3:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/361 "2019-04-28T03:21:27Z")
[quote=“kaylasdad99, post:360, topic:832795”] > [@RTFirefly](#): > > Well yeah, Roberts would preside over the _trial itself_, not over all “Senate trial-related activity,” just what happened on the floor of the Senate when it was performing the function of the impeachment trial itself. > > Here’s what I foresee, should the House bring articles of impeachment immediately: > The impeachment trial is called to order. > The House impeachment manager presents his opening arguments. > The defense attorney says “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you.” > The prosecution spends three days laying out a case. > The defense attorney says “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. The defense rests.” > The prosecutor makes closing arguments. > The defense attorney says “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you.” > > McConnell calls for a vote. > > Result is 51-49 to acquit. Why would he call for a 51-49 vote when he knows he could just say “This is just a bunch of politics. The AG said no collusion. Let the American people decide whether we need to impeach or not.” Now if the economy collapses and people hate Trump, then that’s a game changer, but right now, if McConnell just nullifies the whole thing, what’s the consequence? Most Americans don’t want impeachment. I don’t know why this is so hard for libtards to understand. ---
**Author:** ![asahi](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/asahi/32/8693_2.png) [@asahi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/asahi)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/362 "2019-04-28T03:23:52Z")
> [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](#): > > Congress needs to keep digging. My hypothesis, which the so-called “intelligent” netizens of SDMB laughed at me for, was that the president doesn’t get impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors; he gets impeached when the country is in a bad mood. Fact! ---
**Author:** ![Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/b487fb/32.png) [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walken_After_Midnight)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 3:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/363 "2019-04-28T03:43:24Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > My hypothesis, which the so-called “intelligent” netizens of SDMB laughed at me for, was that the president doesn’t get impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors; he gets impeached when the country is in a bad mood. > > Fact! I think Congressional Democrats will launch impeachment proceedings in due course, since it’s their duty to do so, and as they are the adults in the room. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 4:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/364 "2019-04-28T04:34:31Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > …Most Americans don’t want impeachment. I don’t know why this is so hard for libtards to understand. They don’t want it _yet_. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/365 "2019-04-28T04:36:34Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > Here’s what I foresee, should the House bring articles of impeachment immediately: > The impeachment trial is called to order. > The House impeachment manager presents his opening arguments. > The defense attorney says “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you.” > The prosecution spends three days laying out a case. > The defense attorney says “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. The defense rests.” > The prosecutor makes closing arguments. > The defense attorney says “Everything that guy just said is bullshit. Thank you.” > > McConnell calls for a vote. > > Result is 51-49 to acquit. > [@asahi](#): > > Why would he call for a 51-49 vote when he knows he could just say “This is just a bunch of politics. The AG said no collusion. Let the American people decide whether we need to impeach or not.” Because holding the verdict vote gives him a fig leaf of displaying a token respect for the process, even when the outcome is a foregone conclusion. It also gives the America-hating fuckstick the opportunity to take his victory lap, which McConnell has not particular motivation to deny him. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 4:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/366 "2019-04-28T04:57:47Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > But he would have authority over what happened in the room while he was presiding. He would preside, but I think he would really only have authority on a particular matter if a majority of senators were prepared to back him up. AFAIK he would preside as an acting president of the Senate, not as a trial court judge, which means he would be extremely weak. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 5:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/367 "2019-04-28T05:34:08Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > Jee-zus fucking christ! > > What are you all not understanding about life in 2019? > > Do you think that Constitutional norms, political norms, legal norms matter? > > Keep living in denial! Look, I know you wanted to believe that the law, that Mueller, that the Constitution, that norms, that decency would save us…but it hasn’t. > > Maybe the answer is to stop calling the sentinels chicken littles and to start understanding that people are stealing your democracy from you just like the middle school bully who’s taking your lunch money from you. Stop saying “Ah, I’m not really hungry anyway.” Grow a pair. And fucking fight back. > > I know you all hate, hate, hate me for telling you reality, but hating me won’t make reality go away. It is in your face. Trump’s authoritarian testicles are in your face. I do not know what this all means. I mean, I see words and can read them but I am not sure what you are on about. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 12:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/368 "2019-04-28T12:02:20Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > It sounds as though you’re saying Roberts would decide which witnesses would appear, etc. …??? That was the argument by the ship person, and I have yet to see any evidence supporting it. > > (All the evidence I supplied was showing there was nothing like that in accounts of other impeachments or in the statutes, of course; also, my bolding up there.) _Of course_ Roberts would not decide what witnesses would appear. He would not decide _whether_ witnesses would appear. But IF witnesses are allowed to testify on the floor of the Senate (do you think this will be a thing, really?), he would be the one to enforce both sides’ equal right to bring witnesses. What Roberts would most likely do is more mundane. In the unlikely event that Mitch tried to keep the House team acting as prosecution from presenting the articles of impeachment on the Senate floor and stating fully their case for each article, Roberts would shut that shit down. If Mitch tried to give Trump’s defenders the bulk of the floor time, Roberts would shut that shit down too. What exactly is Mitch going to do in an impeachment trial, other than that, that could rig the trial? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 12:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/369 "2019-04-28T12:12:38Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > He would preside, but I think he would really only have authority on a particular matter if a majority of senators were prepared to back him up. AFAIK he would preside as an acting president of the Senate, not as a trial court judge, which means he would be extremely weak. ISTM that it’s the other way around: in the matters I raised in my post to **Sherrerd** , he’d have authority until a majority of Senators voted to take it away from him. It’s true that they could do that. They could vote to give the House impeachment managers only thirty minutes of floor time to make the case for each article, and give Trump’s defenders unlimited time to respond. But they’d have to vote to do that, with everyone watching. I don’t think even this batch of Republicans has that much chutzpah. They’ll rig the rules if they need to when most of the public is paying minimal attention, like they did when they reduced the debate time per judicial nominee from 30 hours to 2 hours. Nobody except political junkies gives a shit about that. But let’s see them rig the rules of an impeachment trial with the cameras rolling and the nation watching. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/370 "2019-04-28T21:36:57Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > ISTM that it’s the other way around: in the matters I raised in my post to **Sherrerd** , **he’d have authority** until a majority of Senators voted to take it away from him. > > It’s true that they could do that. They could vote to give the House impeachment managers only thirty minutes of floor time to make the case for each article, and give Trump’s defenders unlimited time to respond. But they’d have to vote to do that, with everyone watching. > > I don’t think even this batch of Republicans has that much chutzpah. They’ll rig the rules if they need to when most of the public is paying minimal attention, like they did when they reduced the debate time per judicial nominee from 30 hours to 2 hours. Nobody except political junkies gives a shit about that. But let’s see them rig the rules of an impeachment trial with the cameras rolling and the nation watching. I’m not sure why you’re optimistic about this. Why would you think there would be wall-to-wall coverage of procedural matters? Wall-to-wall coverage of The Testimony of Ivanka Trump: sure. Wall-to-wall coverage of votes on procedural rules–that I assure you would be expressed in the driest possible language–really? Seriously? > [@RTFirefly](#): > > _Of course_ Roberts would not decide what witnesses would appear. He would not decide _whether_ witnesses would appear. But IF witnesses are allowed to testify on the floor of the Senate (do you think this will be a thing, really?), he would be the one to enforce both sides’ equal right to bring witnesses. > > What Roberts would most likely do is more mundane. In the unlikely event that Mitch tried to keep the House team acting as prosecution from presenting the articles of impeachment on the Senate floor and stating fully their case for each article, **Roberts would shut that shit down. If Mitch tried to give Trump’s defenders the bulk of the floor time, Roberts would shut that shit down too.** It’s the assertions I’ve highlighted above that I’ve been trying to get you and HMSI to support. All we have so far are your _opinions_. Accounts of previous impeachment proceedings contain no content (that has been presented here) supporting the idea that a Chief Justice would say to a Senate Majority Leader, ‘you must allow the House managers another ten hours and another four witnesses’ (or anything analogous). And then, of course, enforcing any such instructions against the Majority Leader’s wishes. If presiding over a Senate trial confers the authority to tell the Senate what length of time may be allotted to what witness testimony and similar matters, then the fact of that conferral must exist in written form. If it exists only in the imaginations of online posters, then it’s not particularly convincing. Surely one of you can come up with something to support your claims…? ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [April 28, 2019, 9:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/371 "2019-04-28T21:38:44Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > He would preside, but I think he would really only have authority on a particular matter if a majority of senators were prepared to back him up. AFAIK he would preside as an acting president of the Senate, not as a trial court judge, which means he would be extremely weak. That’s the way the historical record makes it look. If someone has some information to the contrary, it would be helpful if it could be produced. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/372 "2019-04-29T00:46:18Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > I’m not sure why you’re optimistic about this. Why would you think there would be wall-to-wall coverage of procedural matters? They’re going to cut away from the impeachment trial if there’s a Senate vote on changing the rules? In what alternate universe? ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 1:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/373 "2019-04-29T01:19:31Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > All we have so far are your _opinions_. > [@](#): > > And all we have are yours. What makes yours better than mine? > > Accounts of previous impeachment proceedings contain no content (that has been presented here) supporting the idea that a Chief Justice would say to a Senate Majority Leader, ‘you must allow the House managers another ten hours and another four witnesses’ (or anything analogous). And then, of course, enforcing any such instructions against the Majority Leader’s wishes. 1. You’re the one talking about witnesses. I’m not. So you can say whatever you want about the zero witnesses I assume the House impeachment team will call, it doesn’t matter to me. Nothing into nothing, carry the nothing…🙂 2. Has there been an impeachment trial where, when the House team made its case in support of each article of impeachment, the Senate cut it short and refused to give it the time it intended to use to make its case? You must have found such a case, since you are so sure of what would happen if the Senate Majority Leader did such a thing. Please give specifics. 1. Ditto equal time: has there been an impeachment trial where the Senate refused to allow one side the same amount of time to make its case as the other side got to make _its_ case? Tell me how that played out too, since you claim to have the support of the historical record here. Thanks muchly. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Kent\_Clark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kent_clark/32/105_2.png) [@Kent\_Clark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kent_Clark)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/374 "2019-04-29T01:33:11Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > They’re going to cut away from the impeachment trial if there’s a Senate vote on changing the rules? > > In what alternate universe? I guess you’re pretty young, **RTFirefly** [In the same universe where CBS kept showing a football game while the House voted to impeach Bill Clinton.](https://danratherjournalist.org/anchorman/breaking-news/bill-clintons-impeachment-trial) > [@](#): > > News agencies were on alert in December 1998, waiting to cover the impeachment hearing, and to capture, and comment on, the president’s remarks on December 20, after he was impeached. _ **While CNN opted for a split screen to cover both the debate in the House and the bombing of Baghdad, CBS went to a football game, the only network not to cover the hearing.** _ [emphasis added] The “sense of history and decorum did not last long,” and Dan Rather then announced the vote of impeachment on the bottom of the screen during the football game. It was the most drastic example of a corporate decision to value entertainment and paid sponsors over journalistic ethics. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/375 "2019-04-29T11:22:50Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > I guess you’re pretty young, **RTFirefly** > > [In the same universe where CBS kept showing a football game while the House voted to impeach Bill Clinton.](https://danratherjournalist.org/anchorman/breaking-news/bill-clintons-impeachment-trial) Do you have a better source? In terms of clarity, that is, not authoritativeness. I’m not at all clear about what CBS cut to the football game _from_. Rather and [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton) agree that the House voted articles of impeachment against Clinton on Saturday, December 19, 1998. Rather seems to say CBS’ cutaway happened the next day, on Sunday, December 20: > [@](#): > > News agencies were on alert in December 1998, waiting to cover the impeachment hearing, and to capture, and comment on, the president’s remarks on December 20, after he was impeached. While CNN opted for a split screen to cover both the debate in the House and the bombing of Baghdad, CBS went to a football game, the only network not to cover the hearing. ‘The hearing’? \*What \*hearing, Dan? Hearings are held _before_ the final vote, not after. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/376 "2019-04-29T12:52:14Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > Do you have a better source? In terms of clarity, that is, not authoritativeness. I’m not at all clear about what CBS cut to the football game _from_. > > Rather and [Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton) agree that the House voted articles of impeachment against Clinton on Saturday, December 19, 1998. Rather seems to say CBS’ cutaway happened the next day, on Sunday, December 20: ‘The hearing’? \*What \*hearing, Dan? Hearings are held _before_ the final vote, not after. Probably one of the two NFL games on Saturday December 19, 1998, _during the hearings_. > **[1998 NFL Weekly League Schedule | Pro-Football-Reference.com](https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1998/games.htm)** > > Check out the 1998 NFL Weekly League Schedule including AFC and NFC results and standings on Pro-football-reference.com ---
**Author:** ![bobot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bobot/32/21622_2.png) [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/377 "2019-04-29T13:31:43Z")
McConnell showed that when Obama had a supreme court vacancy to fill that sitting on one’s hands and doing nothing is acceptable. Today we have the white house simply refusing to cooperate with subpoenas, and there are no consequences. Even if the house does its impeachment thing, I would be surprised to zero degree if McConnell chose to sit on his hands again. It would actually surprise me if he chose to act in any way. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/378 "2019-04-29T15:01:20Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > More to the point, I don’t know how many more times i can say it before it sinks in that it is far, far more important to defeat Trump in an actual election than to impeach him, somehow remove him from office, and leave those who voted for him feeling cheated. Yes, if you believe that re-electing Trump, who quite possibly will be largely ineffective in getting anything done due to House (and hopefully Senate) being controlled by the Democrats, is more dangerous to the future of this country than future presidents being sent a message that it’s okay, do whatever you want and you will not face any consequences or have to fear impeachment. I don’t believe that. And I am taking into consideration that at the present time, it seems highly unlikely that Trump would even be convicted. Impeach Now! ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/379 "2019-04-29T15:47:06Z")
It’s always been the case that presidents whose SUPPORTIVE party controlled \>1/3 of the senate have nothing to fear from impeachment. ---
**Author:** ![RTFirefly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c77e96/32.png) [@RTFirefly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RTFirefly)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2019, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795/380 "2019-04-29T16:08:50Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Probably one of the two NFL games on Saturday December 19, 1998, _during the hearings_. > > [1998 NFL Weekly League Schedule | Pro-Football-Reference.com](https://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/1998/games.htm) Yes, there were NFL games that Saturday. Your ‘probably,’ though, is unsupported so far. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795.md?page=18) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeachment-proceedings-will-they-happen/832795.md?page=20)