# 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:** 286
**Author:** ![Airbeck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/airbeck/32/6574_2.png) [@Airbeck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Airbeck)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5701 "2019-11-26T21:25:59Z")
You do realize that this precedent goes for both sides going forward right? No more oversight means no more oversight in either direction. Or are you all of a sudden going to have an epiphany about executive authority and oversight once a Democrat is elected president? ---
**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 26, 2019, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5702 "2019-11-26T21:28:22Z")
> [@Akaj](#): > > Thanks for your detailed set of answers. I’m with you on deploring this position. What do these people think, that a president should never be impeached, no matter what he does? I find it hard to believe there are people who would actually vote for Trump because they feel that way, but they could just throw up their hands and not vote at all. Yes! They do think this. They support what they call the doctrine of the Unitary Executive, which is just fancy Federalist Society Speak for “autocratic ruler of our choice.” I believe many former Trump voters will in fact sit this election out unless a progressive Democrat is nominated. Then they will come out and vote for Trump again. Remember, many of Trump’s supporters live in a Fox “News” alternate “reality,” which isn’t reality at all – but it allows them to believe that the impeachment efforts are based on partisanship and not the actual established facts. > [@Akaj](#): > > Doesn’t this allow a precedent to be set that, as long as your impeachable act is in the last 18 months of your term, you’re in the clear? It does, and that’s one of the main reasons that Dems went ahead with their efforts despite the election and all the challenges it will bring for their candidates. No doubt you remember this is the exact same tactic McConnell ran for the Merrick Garland vote theft. “It’s too close to the election! Let The People™ decide!” What they really mean is, “give us enough time to let the Russians work their magic.” > [@Akaj](#): > > But who’ll pay attention to the committees’ findings once the impeachment is over? They’re sure not going to impeach him again. And anything that comes to light after the inquiry will be easy for the GOP to handwave away as more partisan witchuntery. I don’t know. The GOP is already using that handwaving tactic, and it’s not working out so well. A majority in this country still want impeachment proceedings to occur. Saw a poll this morning that reflected 50% want to impeach _and remove_, while 43% believe impeachment is not justified. (Interesting correlation there between that figure and the number of people who take their news from Fox, no?) Schiff made a point of saying that a bill of impeachable offenses was much like an indictment. If facts reveal further impeachable conduct by Trump before articles have been passed to the Senate, then the articles could be superseded with a new bill. > [@Akaj](#): > > Will any future president ever be impeachable for anything? I don’t dispute anything you’re saying, but these things should take days, not months. What’s so hard about deciding a subpoena is valid? Judicial proceedings are slow and deliberate by design. I’d think hard before changing this function of the courts as having served us decently well for our entire history. In fact, the decision about deciding whether a subpoena is valid has far-reaching consequences throughout our system, both in terms of the respective powers of the legislative and executive branches as well as to what extent to draw the line on the very real concept of executive privilege (not blanket immunity, as Trump wrongly asserted). That’s why we get 120-page rulings to answer the questions. I think the fundamental mistake made in 2016 is that the majority of the population was not really paying attention to the sharp focus on the goals of a segment of the citizenry as approached starting with Newt Gingrich, the Koch brothers, the Federalist Society, etc. These people are on a mission, willing to use scorched earth tactics, and we didn’t see it. We did not appreciate that they would be willing to subvert our entire system of government and happily use Russian assistance to literally tear apart our every tradition and institution in furtherance of their autocratic dreams. This includes a heretofore unknown willingness to support a person obviously unqualified for the job and to ignore/commit any crime to ensure he keeps his useful idiot status. This is their moment. They are going to fight like hell. We must do the same, but with the adjunct requirement of working within the rule of law, which they will not. Honestly, I don’t know if we end up as a western-style democracy at the end of it. > [@Akaj](#): > > Don’t Biden and Buttigieg also benefit, since they’re not bound by the Senate schedule? They will, but they don’t have the built-in war chest that Bloomberg brings. It’s handy when you can afford to buy a presidency – or at least try. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5703 "2019-11-26T21:28:28Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > At this point, I suspect President Trump will declare himself exonerated in just about any plausible scenario: either the House doesn’t vote to impeach or the Senate votes for acquittal. Fuck that. He could be impeached, removed, found guilty in court, sentenced to prison, appeal 85 times (losing each and every one of them), and still claim himself exonerated. And his base and a vast majority of the Republican party, will agree. ---
**Author:** ![Shoeless](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shoeless/32/7099_2.png) [@Shoeless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shoeless)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 9:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5704 "2019-11-26T21:31:04Z")
Sorry if this question has already been asked and answered… If so, just point me to the relevant posts. Suppose the House votes to impeach, and the Senate fails to convict and remove. Now suppose Trump gets reelected, Dems retain the House, GOP retains the Senate. Is there any reason the House can’t attempt to impeach again, provided it’s not the same charges? Can they keep something in their back pocket that they could come after him for in his second term? ---
**Author:** ![Tired\_and\_Cranky](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a87d85/32.png) [@Tired\_and\_Cranky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tired_and_Cranky)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5705 "2019-11-26T21:42:21Z")
> [@Shoeless](#): > > Suppose the House votes to impeach, and the Senate fails to convict and remove. Now suppose Trump gets reelected, Dems retain the House, GOP retains the Senate. Is there any reason the House can’t attempt to impeach again, provided it’s not the same charges? Can they keep something in their back pocket that they could come after him for in his second term? They could impeach him on new charges or even the exact same charges. There is no double jeopardy protection against impeachment but, under the conditions you describe, why would Democrats expect different results from a second impeachment? ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5706 "2019-11-26T22:37:34Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > Because Dems aren’t interested in doing a \*thorough \*job in their impeachment hearing. They are only interested in saying that they had them. There, we’ve done our jobs, Trump will never be thrown out of office in the Senate trial anyway, obstruction charges laid out by Mueller are just oh so confusing that the public will never be able to understand them, we just want to get this shit over with as soon as possible so we can get back to the election, and blah fucking blah. I understand the politics behind it, but as for me I see this as mostly a gutless and feckless shirking of their duty to uphold the US constitution. I understand the Senate will not vote to convict and that the impeachment is just an exercise. My complaint is that the exercise has not gone far enough to reveal everything rotten that can be revealed about this administration. ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 10:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5707 "2019-11-26T22:39:50Z")
> [@Aspenglow](#): > > No doubt you remember this is the exact same tactic McConnell ran for the Merrick Garland vote theft. “It’s too close to the election! Let The People™ decide!” What they really mean is, “give us enough time to let the Russians work their magic.” There are two irrefutable counter-arguments to “let’s just let the election deal with this mess”: One: Trump cheated in the 2016 election and is trying to cheat in 2020. Why should we let a tainted election determine his fate? Two: The Founders could have easily written the impeachment clause to only apply to appointed officials, but they didn’t. They explicitly included the President, which means they didn’t care how soon the next election is. They want the bastard to be run out of town on a rail, now. ---
**Author:** ![Shoeless](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/shoeless/32/7099_2.png) [@Shoeless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shoeless)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5708 "2019-11-26T22:56:40Z")
> [@Tired\_and\_Cranky](#): > > They could impeach him on new charges or even the exact same charges. There is no double jeopardy protection against impeachment but, under the conditions you describe, why would Democrats expect different results from a second impeachment? I wouldn’t expect any different results, but they could drag the next investigation out much longer, just keep hammering away. ---
**Author:** ![Akaj](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/akaj/32/145_2.png) [@Akaj](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Akaj)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2019, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5709 "2019-11-26T23:01:16Z")
> [@Sage\_Rat](#): > > Bill Barr can interpret the law just as widely as we could ever imagine. He could interpret it to mean that the sky is purple, not blue, and if the SC goes against him he could agree with them but then offer a new interpretation saying that the sky is chartreuse and this will have to be fought all of the way to the Supreme Court again because it’s a different argument from before and the judicial branch has to give deference to the Executive and presume faithful intent; or, he could simply interpret their ruling as an agreement with his interpretation, despite the plain text saying otherwise. All of the FBI and attorney generals, ultimately, obey the US Attorney General and follow his instruction not the Supreme Court. > > For every subpoena, the executive branch simply has to switch to a new argument and force it to go through the entire depth of the court system to get slapped down. > > If they run out of creativity, they can simply interpret the SC ruling in their favor. > [@Aspenglow](#): > > Judicial proceedings are slow and deliberate by design. I’d think hard before changing this function of the courts as having served us decently well for our entire history. In fact, the decision about deciding whether a subpoena is valid has far-reaching consequences throughout our system, both in terms of the respective powers of the legislative and executive branches as well as to what extent to draw the line on the very real concept of executive privilege (not blanket immunity, as Trump wrongly asserted). That’s why we get 120-page rulings to answer the questions. This right here is what might be, for me, the most frustrating thing about this process. We have an independent judiciary as a bulwark against dictatorship, but the GOP has figured out how to abuse that system to defend Trump’s dictatorial practices. And isn’t this essentially Trump’s MO in business, too? Lie, cheat, break contracts and fight it in court until the other guy dies or runs out of money. Funny thing is, Republicans like to piss and moan about frivolous tort cases that tie up corporate legal departments. But I guess IOKWARDI. ---
**Author:** ![drad\_dog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5710 "2019-11-27T00:33:38Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > So how do you view the Republicans in light of their actions during this? They are the loyal and honorable opposition of course. ---
**Author:** ![Bumbershoot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bumbershoot/32/3428_2.png) [@Bumbershoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bumbershoot)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5711 "2019-11-27T00:52:17Z")
Looks like Trump is throwing Rudy under the bus, in an interview with Bill O’Reilly: [Trump Denies Sending Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine for Biden Probe](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-26/trump-denies-sending-rudy-giuliani-to-ukraine-for-biden-probe) > [@](#): > > Trump: “No, I didn’t direct him, but he is a warrior, he is a warrior” > > Asked by O’Reilly what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine, Trump said “you have to ask that to Rudy…” > > “Rudy has other clients, other than me" ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5712 "2019-11-27T00:59:21Z")
Bill O’Reilly?? He has a job? ---
**Author:** ![Bumbershoot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bumbershoot/32/3428_2.png) [@Bumbershoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bumbershoot)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5713 "2019-11-27T01:02:23Z")
Surprised me, too! ---
**Author:** ![Ike\_Witt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ike_witt/32/283_2.png) [@Ike\_Witt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ike_Witt)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5714 "2019-11-27T01:02:48Z")
I am really wondering what Bolton is hoping for. ---
**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 27, 2019, 2:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5715 "2019-11-27T02:41:50Z")
> [@Ike\_Witt](#): > > I am really wondering what Bolton is hoping for. Phenomenal book sales. ---
**Author:** ![Guest-starring\_Id](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guest-starring_id/32/21736_2.png) [@Guest-starring\_Id](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guest-starring_Id)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5716 "2019-11-27T02:43:44Z")
[Private depositions today with Reeker and Sandy.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/the-latest-from-the-impeachment-inquiry-including-new-transcripts-and-a-court-ruling) ---
**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 27, 2019, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5717 "2019-11-27T03:14:35Z")
> [@Bumbershoot](#): > > Looks like Trump is throwing Rudy under the bus, in an interview with Bill O’Reilly: > > [Trump Denies Sending Rudy Giuliani to Ukraine for Biden Probe](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-11-26/trump-denies-sending-rudy-giuliani-to-ukraine-for-biden-probe) Mentions of Giuliani by Donald J. Trump during his July 25 call with President Zelenskyy of Ukraine: > [@Donald J. Trump](#): > > I will personally tell you that one of my assistants spoke with Mr. Giuliani just recently and we are hoping very much that Mr. Giuliani will be able to travel to Ukraine and we will meet once he comes to Ukraine. > … > Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what’s happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. > … > I will have Mr. Giuliani give you a call and I am also going to have Attorney General Barr call and we will get to the bottom of it. > … > Good. Well, thank you very much and I appreciate that. I will tell Rudy and Attorney General Barr to call. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 6:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5718 "2019-11-27T06:18:16Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > You do realize that this precedent goes for both sides going forward right? No more oversight means no more oversight in either direction. > > Or are you all of a sudden going to have an epiphany about executive authority and oversight once a Democrat is elected president? I know for a fact every republican in every government position will. ---
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 6:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5719 "2019-11-27T06:20:13Z")
From **Bumbershoot** ’s paywalled link: > [@Donald Trump](#): > > Rudy has other clients, other than me. He’s done a lot of work in Ukraine over the years. I wonder if Rudy can hear the bus revving it’s engine. ---
**Author:** ![Bumbershoot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bumbershoot/32/3428_2.png) [@Bumbershoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bumbershoot)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2019, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/5720 "2019-11-27T06:55:17Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > From **Bumbershoot** ’s paywalled link: Sorry about that. I was able to read it without paying but when I clicked it just now, at the bottom it said “Last of your three free articles”. This one should be free: [Trump distances himself from Giuliani’s Ukraine efforts](https://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-distances-himself-from-giulianis-ukraine-efforts/) (CBS News) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=285) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=287)