# The Trump Impeachment Inquiry **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [September 24, 2019, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771 "2019-09-24T20:23:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 186
**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:** [November 2, 2019, 12:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3701 "2019-11-02T00:35:59Z")
> [@kenobi\_65](#): > > To quote Agent Kay, in _Men in Black_: > > “A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.” Just to be clear, if my other post wasn’t. I meant, “People here for the most part seem reasonably intelligent, and I see no reason not to think that most of the public is also.” ---
**Author:** ![KidCharlemagne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ed8c4c/32.png) [@KidCharlemagne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/KidCharlemagne)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 12:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3702 "2019-11-02T00:47:35Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Just to be clear, if my other post wasn’t. I meant, “People here for the most part seem reasonably intelligent, and I see no reason not to think that most of the public is also.” You were right the first time. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Sage\_Rat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sage_rat/32/399_2.png) [@Sage\_Rat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sage_Rat)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3703 "2019-11-02T01:21:06Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Just to be clear, if my other post wasn’t. I meant, “People here for the most part seem reasonably intelligent, and I see no reason not to think that most of the public is also.” Is there any quantity of certifiably true data, both in variety and in completeness, which would convince you otherwise? That is to say, do you believe that this is true because of _reality_ or because your mind refuses to contemplate the horror of the reality of living on a planet where nearly everyone is slightly above the level of a talking dog? ---
**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:** [November 2, 2019, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3704 "2019-11-02T01:48:52Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > So: Can the prosecution ask Roberts to be the one to give an overview of what is and is not legal, if he does not start off the trial himself giving a speech that describes it? I think that’s a very bad idea. Let’s assume that the Chief Justice defines a bright line between legal and illegal, and the trial proceeds in such a way that it is clear the President did or did not cross that line. And all this unfolds in open session, in public, broadcast around the world. And then the Senate votes in the other direction. What then? If the President is found guilty when the evidence shows he did not cross the bright line laid down by the Chief Justice, does he get to demand a do over? Does the Chief Justice overrule 2/3 of the Senate and hand down a directed verdict of acquittal? If the President is acquitted, despite the evidence, do we get to impeach him over and over, or is there some sort of double jeopardy attached? Either way, the process of impeachment slips from being the most potent weapon in the system of checks and balances to an even bigger dumpster fire than we’re already in the middle of. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 12:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3705 "2019-11-02T12:44:10Z")
> [@Kent\_Clark](#): > > Either way, the process of impeachment slips from being the most potent weapon in the system of checks and balances . . . . It’s not potent. Even when hundreds of thousands of United States citizens died in a war largely fought to make men free, and the President, Andrew Johnson, tried to reverse that, he got an acquittal – in a vote that a liberal president, in my lifetime, considered a [Profile in Courage](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiles_in_Courage#Accuracy). And even when the President tried to get a foreign government to go after his opponent’s son, [precisely zero Republicans supported an impeachment investigation](https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/31/politics/donald-trump-house-impeachment-vote-gop/index.html). Potent is when a majority can throw the chief executive out of office due to loss of confidence. It happened to [Lord North](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_votes_of_no_confidence_in_British_governments#Defeat_of_the_North_ministry). The American revolutionaries thought they could do better. I don’t think so. If Trump is impeached and acquitted, as now seems likely, his unchecked hubris will be confirmed as acceptable to our system. Can’t get more impotent than that outside of actual sex. ---
**Author:** ![DesertDog](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/desertdog/32/11503_2.png) [@DesertDog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DesertDog)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 12:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3706 "2019-11-02T12:54:10Z")
> [@bobot](#): > > I still have no hope that the senate will do the right thing here, but I am satisfied that, so far, the house is doing the right thing and history will forever state that. A conviction in the senate would blow me away just as Trump’s electoral college victory did. It will get them on record as to who is for the rule of law in this country and who is willing to do _anything_ for political power. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 1:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3707 "2019-11-02T13:48:10Z")
Republicans set to [officially lift those goalposts](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/growing-number-of-gop-senators-consider-acknowledgingtrumps-quid-pro-quo-on-ukraine/2019/11/01/72084a3e-fcc4-11e9-9534-e0dbcc9f5683_story.html) and move them again. The new talking point is that they accept that a quid pro quo happened, but that it was somehow fine, or at least not impeachable. Which makes it strange that they fought that there was a quid pro quo in the first place if there was nothing wrong with it. \* "A growing number of Senate Republicans are ready to acknowledge that President Trump used U.S. military aid as leverage to force Ukraine to investigate former vice president Joe Biden and his family as the president repeatedly denies a quid pro quo. In this shift in strategy to defend Trump, these Republicans are insisting that the president’s action was not illegal and does not rise to the level of an impeachable offense as the Democratic-led House moves forward with the open phase of its probe."\* ---
**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:** [November 2, 2019, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3708 "2019-11-02T13:56:49Z")
It was just a stupid sacrificial talking point anyway. The quid pro quo wasn’t the core of what was wrong with Trump’s behavior, it was the window dressing. However they want to [play with it, it’s still saying “Look over here, and not at the actual issue”. And “not illegal”, whether true or false, is more of the same misdirection. Fuck them, they’re not fooling thinking people with that bullshit. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3709 "2019-11-02T14:27:57Z")
Rachel Bitecofer on Pelosi’s strategy and how the GOP fucked themselves by demanding the House Investigation be public: > [@](#): > > Not sure many people realize how shrewd Pelosi et al. were w this impeachment resolution. As you all know, I don’t often have occasion to compliment NP on strategy, but in this, she was very savvy- capitalizing on the GOP’s insistence on open process. Now, to some degree, and has has been noted in media, the GOP’s focus on process is 1 of necessity, the substance is so terrible they can not talk about it at all. That said, Pelosi worked them on this… > > Let me explain. Despite their public protestations, to the contrary, the LAST thing Rs wanted is sunlight on the details on this scandal. The details, esp taken collectively, are, well, damning. Which is why my expectation was they planned to use their control of the senate to squelch the “trial” component as much as possible, bc folks, they have to acquit a guilty man at the end. > > What _might_ have happened was that the investigatory components might have happened fairly invisibly, over in the House, bc unlike the other recent impeachments, there was no investigation done so the House is doing it in real time. As such, it might have made sense to move through this evidence gathering stage quickly & fairly quietly, knowing the senate trial would allow the public the opp to “weigh” the evidence. \*\*Pelosi used their staged outrage about process to be able to move much of the trial component to the House, where it can be visible. \*\* > > Now, there is no way for McConnell to rush the acquittal through w/o a public airing of the evidence. I’m not sure people appreciate how imp this is and the effect it is likely to have on public opinion. Also, the response that will come from the acquittal. > > It definitely makes McConnell’s job harder. Keep in mind, at some point McConnell is going to be forced to put this on the floor & his endangered GOP senators are going to be forced to take a very unappetizing vote that will be immediately weaponized against them by their Dem opponents. > > The worst way for this to go down is for the public to 1st get to see the depth and breadth of the case against Trump then see him acquitted bc its going to make those votes toxic & its going to turn the 2020 vote into a massive referendum. I think this is likely to exasperate the enthusiasm advantage Ds already hold in 2020, bc both Ds and many Independents are going to see the 2020 election, and their participation in it, as the only avenue to put the brakes on Trump. That’s known as “stakes,” and high stakes are great turnout juicers. > **(emphasis mine, JT)** ---
**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:** [November 2, 2019, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3710 "2019-11-02T14:31:15Z")
A _quid pro quo_ is not needed to charge the crime of soliciting assistance for a federal campaign from a foreign government. A _quid pro quo_ is needed to charge the crime of bribery, consisting of a government official refraining from performing a legal duty until a thing of value is delivered to them. ---
**Author:** ![Fiveyearlurker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/da6949/32.png) [@Fiveyearlurker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiveyearlurker)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3711 "2019-11-02T14:38:03Z")
True. But we have a lot of the GOP on the record emphatically staying that there was no quid pro quo. They will have to address that they have changed their minds, and if that was their line then, and we now know that this line was crossed, how they can still support this president. ---
**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:** [November 2, 2019, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3712 "2019-11-02T14:55:20Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Rachel Bitecofer on Pelosi’s strategy and how the GOP fucked themselves by demanding the House Investigation be public: The Republicans have wanted it to be public all along; they’ve known for a while there would be impeachment proceedings. This is what they want. What they’re concerned about now is the timing. Now that it’s going to the inquiry stage, the GOP will most likely start pushing for a vote. “If Democrats have the evidence, then let’s put it to a vote now. Let’s put it to a vote and let the Senate put it to a trial.” Yes, the tactic could backfire. But, I think the strategy all along has been to push impeachment to a final vote in the Senate, at which point the Senate acquits and then makes Trump politically bullet-proof. However, if some new outrage crops up, or the economy spirals downward, then Trump’s impeachment is in the hands of Senators more concerned about their political futures than his and their party’s. ---
**Author:** ![DigitalC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ebca7d/32.png) [@DigitalC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DigitalC)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3713 "2019-11-02T15:53:29Z")
> [@asahi](#): > > The Republicans have wanted it to be public all along; they’ve known for a while there would be impeachment proceedings. They claimed they did but it does not benefit them in any way. ---
**Author:** ![OttoDaFe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ottodafe/32/356_2.png) [@OttoDaFe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OttoDaFe)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 4:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3714 "2019-11-02T16:08:53Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > Rachel Bitecofer on Pelosi’s strategy and how the GOP fucked themselves by demanding the House Investigation be public: > [@](#): > > Now, there is no way for McConnell to rush the acquittal through w/o a public airing of the evidence. Wanna bet? “You’ve already seen the so-called ‘evidence’ in the House proceedings. All in favor of conviction? All in favor of acquittal? Acquitted!” [BANG] > [@](#): > > I think this is likely to exasperate the enthusiasm advantage Ds already hold in 2020 … I think the word she’s looking for is “exacerbate,” but I’m not sure even that’s the right word since it normally means “make something worse.” Or maybe she means “from the GOP viewpoint.” ---
**Author:** ![Skywatcher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skywatcher/32/254_2.png) [@Skywatcher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skywatcher)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3715 "2019-11-02T16:10:15Z")
> [@Walken\_After\_Midnight](#): > > A _quid pro quo_ is needed to charge the crime of bribery, consisting of a government official refraining from performing a legal duty until a thing of value is delivered to them. Like the recent offers from the White House to aid Senators’ reelection campaigns. ---
**Author:** ![JohnT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnt/32/15048_2.png) [@JohnT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JohnT)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3716 "2019-11-02T16:13:35Z")
> [@OttoDaFe](#): > > Wanna bet? “You’ve already seen the so-called ‘evidence’ in the House proceedings. All in favor of conviction? All in favor of acquittal? Acquitted!” [BANG]I think the word she’s looking for is “exacerbate,” but I’m not sure even that’s the right word since it normally means “make something worse.” Or maybe she means “from the GOP viewpoint.” Yeah, I think she corrected that phrasing in a later tweet. McConnell isn’t in charge of the trial, so your scenario couldn’t even play out as you expressed it. The Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is in charge. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3717 "2019-11-02T16:28:41Z")
One thing making my brain pan itch: what does Darth Putin get out of this? It would appear that he wants the Ukraine deal to go through, as it helps his guy win. But if Ukraine gets those Javelin missiles, Russian tanks will blow up with Russian soldiers in them. So, seems to me, Pooty Poot must at least _publicly_ oppose the deal, unless his grip on power is so absolute and total, he need not worry. OR, he doesn’t expect them to be used. Because a cease-fire deal is in the works, one that essentially gives him whatever he wants in terms of settling with Ukraine and maybe even getting the sanctions lifted when Ukraine confesses to interfering with US elections. Even with those missiles, how much of a chance does Ukraine have against Russia? Zero, zip, zilch, nada damn thing. So, Russian keeps Crimea and whatever chunk of Eastern Ukraine they want, Russia is innocent of interference, sanctions come off. Maybe even Tillerson goes back to remake that Exxonent Arctic Adventure for that sweet, sweet light crude! The missiles never get used, maybe don’t even get unpacked. So, all Vlad is saying is: Give peace a chance… ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 6:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3718 "2019-11-02T18:14:33Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > One thing making my brain pan itch: **what does Darth Putin get out of this**? \ The withholding of the military aid from the period it was approved by Congress (some of it as far back as last February) to September 11, 2019, forced Zelenskyy to the table and to make a deal more favorable to Putin than he would otherwise have had to make. So to that extent, the benefits inured entirely to Putin. I think you basically put your finger on it with the rest of what you posted. ---
**Author:** ![Aspenglow](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/aspenglow/32/76_2.png) [@Aspenglow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Aspenglow)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 6:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3719 "2019-11-02T18:27:13Z")
> [@OttoDaFe](#): > > Wanna bet? “You’ve already seen the so-called ‘evidence’ in the House proceedings. \*\*All in favor of conviction? All in favor of acquittal? Acquitted!” [BANG]\*\*I think the word she’s looking for is “exacerbate,” but I’m not sure even that’s the right word since it normally means “make something worse.” Or maybe she means “from the GOP viewpoint.” Moscow Mitch has already affirmatively stated in public that if the House votes articles of impeachment, then he expects a trial to last for at least 6 to 8 weeks. He will run it 6 days a week, Mondays through Saturdays. So the scenario you envision doesn’t look like it will come to pass. Interestingly, if it goes like that, the person who will likely benefit the most is Joe Biden. All the senators in the Democratic primary race will be forced to choose either to continue running their campaigns while absenting themselves from the removal portion of the impeachment proceedings (not wise) or forego campaigning to attend the impeachment proceedings (perilous). This will likely occur during the crucial period in the run-up from the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary in February to the Super Tuesday primaries in March. What will Sanders, Warren, Klobuchar, Harris, Booker and Bennet do? ---
**Author:** ![Dinsdale](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/97f17d/32.png) [@Dinsdale](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dinsdale)\ **Post date:** [November 2, 2019, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/3720 "2019-11-02T19:03:00Z")
The Repubs have shown their strategy will be, “this is just a continuance of the ongoing harassment/investigation of Trump since he was elected. Nothing but grandstanding and an attempt to overturn the election by the Dems.” And enough of the public will go with that, that Repub congresscritters can go along with that. To quote a great man — “SO SAD!” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=185) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=187)