# Please explain how McConnell will prevent the Trial of Trump **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 19, 2019, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108 "2019-12-19T19:52:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2019, 7:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/21 "2019-12-20T07:50:08Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Are you sure? I’ve seen commentators saying that these are Senate rules and only require a majority vote to change them. Obviously he’s sure. Doesn’t mean he’s correct, but he’s certain, either way. ---
**Author:** ![HMS\_Irruncible](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hms_irruncible/32/7394_2.png) [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2019, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/22 "2019-12-20T14:56:52Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > It’s frankly not credible that you don’t know this. > > The Supreme Court has already ruled that impeachment is a _political_ exercise. > > Of course it’s going to be partisan, one way or the other. Of course your post is misdirected, because I was addressing Saint Cad who was just confidently assuring us that the trial is definitely _not_ going to be partisan and there’s no evidence to the contrary. You guys should get together and get your story straight. ---
**Author:** ![Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/439d5e/32.png) [@Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Some_Call_Me.Tim)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2019, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/23 "2019-12-20T16:58:34Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > It’s frankly not credible that you don’t know this. > > The Supreme Court has already ruled that impeachment is a _political_ exercise. > > Of course it’s going to be partisan, one way or the other. It’s frankly blah blah blah blah blah know this, but the impeachment was completed earlier this week. The topic of this thread is the trial, not the impeachment. The **trial** requires all jurors(Senators) to swear an oath of impartiality. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2019, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/24 "2019-12-20T17:53:48Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > As far as I know, Roberts doesn’t even have to make rulings. He’s free to move straight to a vote without expressing any opinion whatsoever. (I expect him to do this on all matters of any dispute whatsoever. He will be a potted plant in a robe, just like his predecessor, whose opinion of his role was “I did nothing in particular, and I did it very well.”) He only won’t have to make rulings if there are no disputes presented to him. Let’s say that the Senate refuses the Dem requests to call John Bolton. One of the House Managers could rise and say, “Mr. Chief Justice, the House calls John Bolton to the witness stand.” There would be cries of “Objection!” as it would be in violation of the rules presented by the Senate. The House Manager could then say “Mr. Chief Justice, the Senate has denied us the right to present a complete case and the rule is an unconstitutional interference with the House’s ability to prosecute these articles of impeachment.” CJ Roberts will have to rule one way or the other. And either way he rules, the Senate may overrule him with 51 votes. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2019, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/25 "2019-12-20T20:52:03Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > He only won’t have to make rulings if there are no disputes presented to him. Let’s say that the Senate refuses the Dem requests to call John Bolton. One of the House Managers could rise and say, “Mr. Chief Justice, the House calls John Bolton to the witness stand.” There would be cries of “Objection!” as it would be in violation of the rules presented by the Senate. The House Manager could then say “Mr. Chief Justice, the Senate has denied us the right to present a complete case and the rule is an unconstitutional interference with the House’s ability to prosecute these articles of impeachment.” > > CJ Roberts will have to rule one way or the other. And either way he rules, the Senate may overrule him with 51 votes. I agree. The Chief Justice does not make the rules in an impeachment trial. His role is simply to enforce the rules the Senate has made. And the Senate is free to change those rules at any point by a majority vote - even after the Chief Justice has made a ruling. So this could happen: House Manager: _“Mr. Chief Justice, the House calls John Bolton to the witness stand.”_ Defense: _“Objection.”_ Chief Justice Roberts: _“Objection overruled. Senate rules say the House Manager can call witnesses.”_ Fifty-one Senators: _“We don’t like that rule. We’re changing it.”_ Chief Justice Roberts: _“Then objection sustained. Senate rules say the House Manager cannot call witnesses.”_ ---
**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:** [December 20, 2019, 9:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/26 "2019-12-20T21:36:34Z")
> [@Some\_Call\_Me.Tim](#): > > It’s frankly blah blah blah blah blah know this, but the impeachment was completed earlier this week. No, it hasn’t. Cite: [https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats) ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/27 "2019-12-21T00:16:13Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > No, it hasn’t. > > Cite: > > [Bloomberg - Are you a robot?](https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats) That is certain an opinion. ---
**Author:** ![Flyer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/flyer/32/7298_2.png) [@Flyer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Flyer)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/28 "2019-12-21T04:10:29Z")
Two things stood out to me in the Senate rules that the OP linked to. (A), They appear to envision a rather limited role for the Chief Justice. Paragraph VII (at the bottom of p.224) says that he “may rule on all questions of evidence. . . .” Not “shall,” but “may.” There’s a world of difference between the two. “Shall” is mandatory, but “may” is discretionary. (B), It is clear that the Chief Justice does not have any sort of jurisdiction over the Senate. In the same paragraph, we see two separate individuals functioning: the “Presiding Officer on the trial” (i.e., the Chief Justice); and the “Presiding Officer of the Senate.” This reading is reinforced by paragraph XI, wherein the Presiding Officer of the Senate is given the role of leader. ---
**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:** [December 21, 2019, 6:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/29 "2019-12-21T06:47:31Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That is certain an opinion. Yes, from the constitutional scholar called as a witness by the Democrats themselves during the impeachment inquiry. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 12:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/30 "2019-12-21T12:30:01Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > That is certain an opinion. > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Yes, from the constitutional scholar called as a witness by the Democrats themselves during the impeachment inquiry. :dubious: Why do you now accept opinions in Great Debates? > [@Impeach Trump. Now.](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/impeach-trump-now/780327/220): > > I disagree that it is well-sourced. The fact that Liberal Groups A, B, and C filed lawsuits is not evidence of anything. > > Besides, it’s a literary and cultural COMMENTARY magazine. By definition, that’s opinion. > [@How much would a green new deal actually cost?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-much-would-a-green-new-deal-actually-cost/829204/168): > > No, that’s not how Great Debates works. If he is going to make claims, he needs to back them up, with facts, not opinions. > [@Nancy should hold on to Articles of Impeachment](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/nancy-should-hold-on-to-articles-of-impeachment/845079/56): > > I’m only interested in debates based on facts, not what people _think_ the facts should be. > [@D\_Anconia](#): > > IMHO, I wish that in Great Debates, posters wouldn’t (mis)represent opinions as facts. We’ve had posters, when politely asked for a cite, link to a clearly labeled opinion/editorial piece. Also, personal anecdotes are not cites. > > We have other forums for opinions. > [@Is Trump, plain and simple, a traitor to his country?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-trump-plain-and-simple-a-traitor-to-his-country/818154/296): > > So no cites. In my opinion, Great Debates should be about facts, not random opinions. > > Also, what’s wrong with your caps lock button? > [@The 2017/2018 Trump/GOP tax plan](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-2017-2018-trump-gop-tax-plan/797442/1183): > > I didn’t use the term instant. > > And, rc quoted an opinion piece, not facts. > [@FCC Repeals Net Neutrality Rule](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fcc-repeals-net-neutrality-rule/804522/431): > > If that’s your position, please defend it with citations and facts, not opinions. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 1:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/31 "2019-12-21T13:14:26Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > I agree. The Chief Justice does not make the rules in an impeachment trial. His role is simply to enforce the rules the Senate has made. And the Senate is free to change those rules at any point by a majority vote - even after the Chief Justice has made a ruling. > > So this could happen: > > House Manager: _“Mr. Chief Justice, the House calls John Bolton to the witness stand.”_ > Defense: _“Objection.”_ > Chief Justice Roberts: _“Objection overruled. Senate rules say the House Manager can call witnesses.”_ > Fifty-one Senators: _“We don’t like that rule. We’re changing it.”_ > Chief Justice Roberts: _“Then objection sustained. Senate rules say the House Manager cannot call witnesses.”_ The rules are supposed to be worked out and agreed upon before the trial begins. ---
**Author:** ![Exapno\_Mapcase](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/exapno_mapcase/32/1051_2.png) [@Exapno\_Mapcase](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Exapno_Mapcase)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/32 "2019-12-21T17:18:30Z")
> [@running\_coach](#): > > Why do you now accept opinions in Great Debates? A thing of beauty is a joy for ever: Its loveliness increases; it will never Pass into nothingness; but still will keep A bower quiet for us, and a sleep Full of sweet dreams, and health, and quiet breathing. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/33 "2019-12-21T19:08:00Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The rules are supposed to be worked out and agreed upon before the trial begins. I know they’re supposed to be. But is there any binding rule that prohibits changes during the trial? Or is it just a voluntary agreement not to make any changes? ---
**Author:** ![Chisquirrel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6bbea6/32.png) [@Chisquirrel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chisquirrel)\ **Post date:** [December 21, 2019, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/34 "2019-12-21T19:09:25Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > The rules are supposed to be worked out and agreed upon before the trial begins. It’s funny you think Republicans still give a damn about “supposed to”. ---
**Author:** ![DChord568](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/439d5e/32.png) [@DChord568](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DChord568)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/35 "2019-12-23T20:08:53Z")
I’m sure someone will tell me why this is a stupid idea. But why doesn’t Nancy Pelosi say something along the lines of this: "Senator McConnell has made it abundantly clear through his own words that he has no intention whatsoever of upholding the oath he will take prior to an impeachment trial in the Senate. "That oath reads ‘I, [name], solemnly swear, (or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment now pending, I will do impartial justice, according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.’ “Unless and until Senator McConnell repudiates his earlier statements stating that he has no intention of being impartial in these proceedings and promises he will uphold his oath, the House will NOT forward the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.” In other words, hold this asshole’s feet to the fire and shine the spotlight on him. He needs to made to squirm a little for saying something so egregious. I grant that even if he backtracked on the statement, his behavior probably wouldn’t be any different. But someone ought to make the point that laws, and oaths, mean something. I don’t see the downside to the Democrats doing this. Obviously, the Repubs, as well as Trump, want to see this all disposed of as quickly as possible. Make 'em wait, and make it clear what is holding things up. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/36 "2019-12-23T20:15:14Z")
> [@Chisquirrel](#): > > It’s funny you think Republicans still give a damn about “supposed to”. What can I say? Gullibility Springs Eternal. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/37 "2019-12-23T20:16:59Z")
> [@DChord568](#): > > I’m sure someone will tell me why this is a stupid idea. > > But why doesn’t Nancy Pelosi say something along the lines of this: > > "Senator McConnell has made it abundantly clear through his own words that he has no intention whatsoever of upholding the oath he will take prior to an impeachment trial in the Senate. > > "That oath reads ‘I, [name], solemnly swear, (or affirm, as the case may be,) that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment now pending, I will do impartial justice, according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God.’ > > “Unless and until Senator McConnell repudiates his earlier statements stating that he has no intention of being impartial in these proceedings and promises he will uphold his oath, the House will NOT forward the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate.” > > In other words, hold this asshole’s feet to the fire and shine the spotlight on him. He needs to made to squirm a little for saying something so egregious. > > I grant that even if he backtracked on the statement, his behavior probably wouldn’t be any different. But someone ought to make the point that laws, and oaths, mean something. > > I don’t see the downside to the Democrats doing this. Obviously, the Repubs, as well as Trump, want to see this all disposed of as quickly as possible. Make 'em wait, and make it clear what is holding things up. The impeachment trial dies on the vine, Trump and the Republicans declare it a “win”. There is the obvious downside. ---
**Author:** ![guizot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guizot/32/3636_2.png) [@guizot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/guizot)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/38 "2019-12-23T20:37:55Z")
McConnell can do just about whatever he wants because there’s nothing to stop him. Roberts might say something, but most likely he’d rather just let McConnell do it, and not get too involved himself. Pelosi’s goal isn’t to try to force Republicans in the Senate, through a trial, to somehow admit that Trump committed egregious acts. Her goal is to accentuate that they are effectively abetting Trump–and to shine a public light on that. > [@Czarcasm](#): > > The impeachment trial dies on the vine, Trump and the Republicans declare it a “win”. > There is the obvious downside. The results of the trial–or even whether they have one or not–are not the real issue here; they’re going to declare it a “win” no matter how it happens. The point is to call public attention to what the Republicans are doing. The strategy is to make this outweigh the inevitable claims of a “win,” and spur anti-Republican turn out in the election. Of course no one knows how well this will work, but it’s probably her best course of action. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 8:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/39 "2019-12-23T20:50:16Z")
> [@guizot](#): > > McConnell can do just about whatever he wants because there’s nothing to stop him. Roberts might say something, but most likely he’d rather just let McConnell do it, and not get too involved himself. Pelosi’s goal isn’t to try to force Republicans in the Senate, through a trial, to somehow admit that Trump committed egregious acts. Her goal is to accentuate that they are effectively abetting Trump–and to shine a public light on that.The results of the trial–or even whether they have one or not–are not the real issue here; they’re going to declare it a “win” no matter how it happens. The point is to call public attention to what the Republicans are doing. The strategy is to make this outweigh the inevitable claims of a “win,” and spur anti-Republican turn out in the election. Of course no one knows how well this will work, but it’s probably her best course of action. If the avalanche of crap that has been shoveled at the public by Trump and the Republicans to date hasn’t attracted the public’s attention, then what makes you think a failed impeachment attempt(and it IS a failure if the trial falls through because Trump doesn’t give a flying fuck about honor and/or integrity) will do the job? ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 23, 2019, 9:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108/40 "2019-12-23T21:04:38Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > It’s frankly not credible that you don’t know this. > > The Supreme Court has already ruled that impeachment is a _political_ exercise. > > Of course it’s going to be partisan, one way or the other. Exactly. Further, McConnell doesn’t have to do anything wrt changing the ‘rules’…they could go by exactly the same rules as was used in Clinton’s senate trial and the result would be the same…Trump is going to get off. There is no ‘fair’ trial that would change this result. McConnell would be stupid to not simply use the same rules as were used for Clinton, including limited numbers of witnesses cross examined privately. Assuming there isn’t something we haven’t heard yet wrt Trump, he’s not going to be hammered by the Senate, and it will be a completely partisan across the board vote, with, perhaps, one or two people voting the other way for political reasons. Just like what happened in the House. The REAL question is, will it be like all the other times of impeachment where the party of the president being impeached loses in the next general election. I think that this will hold true, and Trump will simply be voted out. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/please-explain-how-mcconnell-will-prevent-the-trial-of-trump/845108.md?page=3)