# 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:** 84
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1661 "2019-10-03T16:39:48Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > I disagree. > > ~Max And? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1662 "2019-10-03T16:39:53Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > The counterargument is that if “[t]here are valid reasons to look into Hunter and Joe Biden’s behavior in Ukraine”, then “President Trump asking Ukraine to investigate Biden” may not be “an abuse of power”. > > Therefore, as I said, the Democrats should work to convince Republicans that there are no valid reasons to look into Hunter and Joe Biden’s behavior in Ukraine. > > ~Max But that’s not what Trump’s doing. He didn’t tell the DoJ and FBI to look into wrongdoing, he asked foreign governments (today he did so explicitly) to investigate a political opponent, heavily implying a quid pro quo. A majority of Americans appear to agree that this is an abuse of power. ---
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1663 "2019-10-03T16:43:33Z")
> [@Fiveyearlurker](#): > > But now we have a contemporaneously signed document by Republicans who agreed with Biden. So this argument makes even less sense. Right. That’s why Dems need to get those Republicans to grow some spines and tell the truth. And IMO Obama would be the ideal person\* to explain the situation in terms most voters could understand. \*Not for true MAGAts, of course. But their minds are already made up. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 4:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1664 "2019-10-03T16:44:12Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Disagree. There’s no reason to prove their innocent to show that Trump has abused the office. Assume that Biden & Son are guilty of some crime, and that the DoJ has opened an investigation, and that said investigation requires evidence from Ukraine. Is it an abuse of power for the President to ask Ukraine to cooperate with the DoJ on that investigation? Why, and how then does the DoJ proceed with its lawful inquiry? > [@Ravenman](#): > > This is analogous to Hoover spying on MLK for purely political reasons: whether MLK had affairs is immaterial to the offense. And that is a debate all to itself. While I don’t take a strong position due to ignorance I do not simply assume that Hoover had no reason to spy on MLK. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 4:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1665 "2019-10-03T16:47:36Z")
> [@Airbeck](#): > > And? There are more Republicans than Democrats in the Senate, and Republican Senators appear to be against conviction. So, assuming that the Democrats want to convict the president it is incumbent upon them to convince the Republicans to change their minds. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![steronz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steronz/32/11765_2.png) [@steronz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/steronz)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1666 "2019-10-03T16:48:08Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Assume that Biden & Son are guilty of some crime, and that the DoJ has opened an investigation, and that said investigation requires evidence from Ukraine. Is it an abuse of power for the President to ask Ukraine to cooperate with the DoJ on that investigation? Why, and how then does the DoJ proceed with its lawful inquiry? That seems like an unusual case. Presumably diplomats at the state department would request that investigators in Ukraine work with investigators in the US. If Ukraine refused, it might move up the chain – ultimately the SoS would be asked to intervene to encourage Ukraine’s cooperation, and perhaps if he failed he would apprise the President to get involved. However, the President should be wary of the appearance of impropriety, and should exhaust all other options before getting personally involved in the investigation of a political rival. See: Obama’s behavior towards the Trump/Russia investigation, a target he wasn’t even personally running against. ---
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1667 "2019-10-03T16:48:58Z")
NM ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1668 "2019-10-03T16:55:59Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > But that’s not what Trump’s doing. He didn’t tell the DoJ and FBI to look into wrongdoing, he asked foreign governments (today he did so explicitly) to investigate a political opponent, heavily implying a quid pro quo. A majority of Americans appear to agree that this is an abuse of power. A majority of Americans is _not good enough_ for the Senate even in principle, which has malapportionment built-in. You need a majority of the “states” as represented by the Senate, and right now that is 53% Republican plus one tie-breaker if necessary. Even a majority of Republicans across the country isn’t enough in principle - you need the majority of Americans in at least four states with Republican Senators, and some of those Senators won’t change their minds unless a majority of Republicans in their state want change, and some (like one of mine) won’t change their minds at all unless they are up for reelection. Appearances aside, if a domestic investigation requires foreign law enforcement cooperation it would be appropriate to ask that foreign government to cooperate. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1669 "2019-10-03T16:58:10Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Presumably the 35% of Republicans who think there aren’t valid reasons to look into Biden’s behavior overlap with the 30% of Republicans who think the President abused his power. If this poll is to be trusted, for the most part Democrats should attempt to convince their Republican colleagues that there are not valid reasons to look into Biden’s behavior in the Ukraine. Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to convince more Republicans that the US has standard channels through which investigations of US citizens happen, and are communicated to foreign powers? And that these channels exist to avoid the appearance of impropriety? And that presidents who bypass these channels in order to pressure foreign powers to investigate political rivals are EXACTLY THE REASON THESE CHANNELS EXIST? ---
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1670 "2019-10-03T16:59:43Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Appearances aside, if a domestic investigation requires foreign law enforcement cooperation it would be appropriate to ask that foreign government to cooperate. What domestic investigation? The only investigation going on – on any level – was the one in Trump and Guiliani’s heads. ---
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1671 "2019-10-03T17:00:46Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > I buy your logic in many respects, including Romney‘s desires and the likelihood that the moderate Republicans and Democrats who would otherwise vote against Trump would probably support Romney against Warren. But I think there is a fatal flaw to the plan, which is that the hardcore Trumpkins would revolt and vote Trump as a write-in or stay home. They would see this as a coup by establishment Republicans to wrest back control of the party, and unlike many of their other insane conspiracy theories, they wouldn’t be totally off base to feel that way. > > My impulse is to hope that the Republicans are screwed for a long long time as a result of this dynamic, but another part of me sounds a note of caution that after four years of a Democratic president they will be hungry enough to get Warren or whomever out that they will accept a more conventional Republican nominee. In 2020 though? No way. And it’s not like Trump would be campaigning for Romney in that scenario. My comment was in response to **John\_Stamos’\_Left\_Ear** ’s Post #1610, indicating a scenario where both Trump and Pence had been removed/resigned and no longer available to campaign or anything else. The discussion was about which Republican might be selected as a replacement VP – who must be approved by both the House and Senate – in lieu of Speaker Pelosi assuming the presidency as is the Constitutional order of things. Under those circumstances, I believe Romney would be fairly high up on the list as someone acceptable to both sides. Who do you think it would be? > [@galen\_ubal](#): > > I’d put this up a couple days ago - fast moving story! > > Obviously, the second part is my speculation only. I did see your post and speculation, didn’t realize it was in this thread. 🙂 I had wanted to respond then but Life Interfered and by the time I got back, the thread had moved on. I concur entirely with your speculation that Moscow Mitch may have set a trap. He’s crafty that way. > [@CarnalK](#): > > We can’t be sure he knew it was that damning or how strongly he encouraged Trump to release it. Remember, Trump’s team has been sequestering a whole bunch of conversations. It could be they were out of reach of Mitch’s little sparrows. And I could imagine his encouragement being along the lines of “if you’re sure it’s a nothing burger, release it because things are getting ugly.” If Mitch knew this was the first domino of 10 rather outrageous calls with foreign leaders, then ok it was a trap. **I have a hard time believing he would purposely bring this down.** You’re right we can’t know, but Moscow Mitch has a pretty good network into the White House and its goings on. I find it far easier to believe that he knew exactly what was in the call summary than that he didn’t. Moreover, he has more than once given Trump’s leash a yank when Trump got too far afield, even publicly commenting that Trump’s own behavior might cause his “presidency” to end in impeachment. It was a not-so-veiled warning, and it happened ages ago. I don’t think McConnell wants to bring it down, but I believe he will do that if he believes it is in the best interests of his Senate majority. If Trump has become too reckless and… well, let’s just face it, too nuts for Senate Republicans to control his behavior, then I believe McConnell would reluctantly make the hard choice sooner rather than later. It gives him time to manage the fallout of what he can see is inevitably coming. Teh Base™ is loyal, but they aren’t enough to win an election – or even to keep previously “safe” Republican Senate seats in Republican hands. At some point, they will choose to go down with the Trump Titanic or they will choose to cut the anchor. Given that choice, I think McConnell will cut him loose. ---
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1672 "2019-10-03T17:01:28Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > There are more Republicans than Democrats in the Senate, and Republican Senators appear to be against conviction. So, assuming that the Democrats want to convict the president it is incumbent upon them to convince the Republicans to change their minds. > > ~Max A fools game I’d say. Everyone here knows it. Your framing lacks a sense of reality. While they would be struggling to “convince” the rebupkis will be trolling and making stuff up. Impeachment is a process that will force pols who are feigning a “principled contrarian” position to actually show up for the country or be on the wrong side of history. ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1673 "2019-10-03T17:01:52Z")
> [@steronz](#): > > That seems like an unusual case. Presumably diplomats at the state department would request that investigators in Ukraine work with investigators in the US. If Ukraine refused, it might move up the chain – ultimately the SoS would be asked to intervene to encourage Ukraine’s cooperation, and perhaps if he failed he would apprise the President to get involved. > > However, the President should be wary of the appearance of impropriety, and should exhaust all other options before getting personally involved in the investigation of a political rival. See: Obama’s behavior towards the Trump/Russia investigation, a target he wasn’t even personally running against. Agreed, however I simply don’t know whether Mr. Trump exhausted other options first. Even if he didn’t, I hesitate to consider it an abuse of power if we legitimately needed Ukrainian cooperation for a law enforcement operation. The withholding of aid adds another element of disbelief, but if that was tied to alleged Ukrainian election interference I would hold a similar opinion. It so happens that I believe both supposed investigations are baseless, therefore Mr. Trump probably abused his power, but I am not in a position to conclusively make that judgement. ~Max ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1674 "2019-10-03T17:02:28Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > A majority of Americans is _not good enough_ for the Senate even in principle, which has malapportionment built-in. You need a majority of the “states” as represented by the Senate, and right now that is 53% Republican plus one tie-breaker if necessary. Even a majority of Republicans across the country isn’t enough in principle - you need the majority of Americans in at least four states with Republican Senators, and some of those Senators won’t change their minds unless a majority of Republicans in their state want change, and some (like one of mine) won’t change their minds at all unless they are up for reelection. Obviously there’s very little chance of actual removal from office. Republicans in office have shown very little sign that they value the country and our institutions more than their immediate short-term political future. If this is all you’re saying, then you’ll get no argument from me. Most of the Republicans in the House and Senate are abandoning their oaths of office, and I see little sign that this will change. > [@](#): > > Appearances aside, if a domestic investigation requires foreign law enforcement cooperation it would be appropriate to ask that foreign government to cooperate. There’s no reason to believe that there is any legitimate reason for an investigation into this issue. There’s no reason for you to carry this kind of water for the administration. Its corruption on this is plain to see – Trump essentially admitted to the allegations being investigated by the House (that he’s using his power of office to try and damage a political rival) in public today. ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1675 "2019-10-03T17:02:59Z")
> [@Akaj](#): > > What domestic investigation? The only investigation going on – on any level – was the one in Trump and Guiliani’s heads. OK then… But but but… What if aliens landed, and were taking over the planet? Wouldn’t it be OK then for Trump to call a foreign leader and ask them for favors? Hmmmmm? What about then? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1676 "2019-10-03T17:04:24Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#): > > Wouldn’t it be more reasonable to convince more Republicans that the US has standard channels through which investigations of US citizens happen, and are communicated to foreign powers? And that these channels exist to avoid the appearance of impropriety? And that presidents who bypass these channels in order to pressure foreign powers to investigate political rivals are EXACTLY THE REASON THESE CHANNELS EXIST? I think that’s reasonable, but it doesn’t advance conviction as a goal. Assuming conviction is the goal, taking that path means you would have to convince Republicans that the appearance of impropriety is itself impeachable. I don’t think that’s a winning strategy, because I myself disagree. ~Max ---
**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:** [October 3, 2019, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1677 "2019-10-03T17:04:34Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > A majority of Americans is _not good enough_ for the Senate even in principle, which has malapportionment built-in. You need a majority of the “states” as represented by the Senate, and right now that is 53% Republican plus one tie-breaker if necessary. Even a majority of Republicans across the country isn’t enough in principle - you need the majority of Americans in at least four states with Republican Senators, and some of those Senators won’t change their minds unless a majority of Republicans in their state want change, and some (like one of mine) won’t change their minds at all unless they are up for reelection. > > _**[SIZE=“6”]Appearances aside[/SIZE]**_, if a domestic investigation requires foreign law enforcement cooperation it would be appropriate to ask that foreign government to cooperate. > > ~Max What? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1678 "2019-10-03T17:07:11Z")
> [@Max\_S](#): > > Assume that Biden & Son are guilty of some crime, and that the DoJ has opened an investigation, and that said investigation requires evidence from Ukraine. Is it an abuse of power for the President to ask Ukraine to cooperate with the DoJ on that investigation? Why, and how then does the DoJ proceed with its lawful inquiry? Barr didn’t know about the phone call. You can’t spin this into a legitimate investigation. Besides, what’s Rudy’s legitimate involvement in a legitimate investigation by a legitimate government he isn’t employed by? ---
**Author:** ![Max\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/46a35a/32.png) [@Max\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_S)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1679 "2019-10-03T17:10:33Z")
> [@drad\_dog](#): > > A fools game I’d say. Everyone here knows it. Your framing lacks a sense of reality. While they would be struggling to “convince” the rebupkis will be trolling and making stuff up. > > Impeachment is a process that will force pols who are feigning a “principled contrarian” position to actually show up for the country or be on the wrong side of history. Assuming conviction is the goal, are you implying that Senate Republicans _right now_ will vote to convict because they don’t want to end up on the wrong side of history? ~Max ---
**Author:** ![jsc1953](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/5daacb/32.png) [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)\ **Post date:** [October 3, 2019, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771/1680 "2019-10-03T17:11:02Z")
> [@JohnT](#): > > No, these quotes were in a presser held by Trump earlier this morning. They’re of the spoken variety, not the tweeted kind. Apparently Trump’s counter-strategy is to do out loud on the White House lawn what he got caught red-handed doing on a super-secret phone call. If he’s willing to do it in public it can’t be illegal, right? Bold move. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=83) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-inquiry/840771.md?page=85)