# The Trump Impeachment Trial
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524
**Category:** Politics & Elections
**Created:** [January 16, 2020, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524 "2020-01-16T20:12:52Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 43
### Author:  [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/841 "2020-02-03T18:22:45Z")
So we can imagine dt jr running in 24 and refusing to produce tax returns?
Any other time in history we would be done with this problem in a cycle.
---
### Author:  [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 6:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/842 "2020-02-03T18:39:39Z")
> [@Ravenman](#):
>
> Let’s say Elizabethnie Bidengeig wins the presidency in 2020. When the President learns that Donald Trump, Jr. is going to run in 2024, the President orders Trump’s tax returns to be released.
>
> Folks on either side of the Trump impeachment, I’m curious which precedent do you think should control:
>
> 1. It may be bad, and against the law, but it just isn’t impeachable. (Clinton obstruction/perjury charges.)
> 2. It was a violation of the law, but it was at least partially in the public interest, so we should give the President the benefit of the doubt that the action was not corrupt. (Dershowitz interpretation of the forthcoming Trump acquittal by the Senate.)
> 3. The bar has been lowered so far that just having this old, gay, female president is sufficient for impeachment. (Joni Ernst interpretation of the Trump impeachment by the House.)
> 4. It’s a violation of the law, so of course removal from office is warranted. (Tricked you! This isn’t actually a precedent!)
Don’t forget if you can prove she’s a socialist, you can just go ahead and shoot her.
---
### Author:  [@Rick\_Kitchen](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick_Kitchen)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/843 "2020-02-03T19:16:36Z")
Why are Individual 1’s lawyers still arguing that there was no quid pro quo, when the Republican Senators are all saying they don’t care if there was a quid pro quo?
---
### Author:  [@QuickSilver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/QuickSilver)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/844 "2020-02-03T19:22:24Z")
> [@Rick\_Kitchen](#):
>
> Why are Individual 1’s lawyers still arguing that there was no quid pro quo, when the Republican Senators are all saying they don’t care if there was a quid pro quo?
Consider who their client is.
---
### Author:  [@str8cashhomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/str8cashhomie)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 8:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/845 "2020-02-03T20:25:59Z")
> [@Ravenman](#):
>
> Let’s say Elizabethnie Bidengeig wins the presidency in 2020. When the President learns that Donald Trump, Jr. is going to run in 2024, the President orders Trump’s tax returns to be released.
>
> Folks on either side of the Trump impeachment, I’m curious which precedent do you think should control:
>
> 1. It may be bad, and against the law, but it just isn’t impeachable. (Clinton obstruction/perjury charges.)
> 2. It was a violation of the law, but it was at least partially in the public interest, so we should give the President the benefit of the doubt that the action was not corrupt. (Dershowitz interpretation of the forthcoming Trump acquittal by the Senate.)
> 3. The bar has been lowered so far that just having this old, gay, female president is sufficient for impeachment. (Joni Ernst interpretation of the Trump impeachment by the House.)
> 4. It’s a violation of the law, so of course removal from office is warranted. (Tricked you! This isn’t actually a precedent!)
On a minor note for this hypothetical, it matters whether it happened publicly or in secret.
If the president announces a public policy to do this, congress should attempt to block the action with a bipartisan veto-proof act and/or oversight group in the government should block it if there is applicable law already. If the president then chooses to defy congress, it is clearly impeachable. If congress doesn’t do so, or even if there is a presidential veto I don’t think it would rise to impeachment. I would really hope the democrats would primary her it would hurt her way more than help politically, but it would be a case where I don’t think the remedy would need to go beyond that. If the president obviously tries to beat the clock and just release the returns before anything limiting her power can occur, that should be impeachable.
If the president tries to do this in secret, that alone should be enough to impeach. I’m sure that would be a crime under multiple existing laws, but in any case it is clearly a knowing abuse of power and an attempt to deceive congress and the public into allowing unethical election influence.
---
### Author:  [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 8:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/846 "2020-02-03T20:29:29Z")
There is a law against releasing other people’s tax returns. Just like there’s a law against holding up congressional approved spending. Just like there’s a law against lying under oath.
(I’m starting to come to the opinion that we SHOULD be removing more presidents from office!)
---
### Author:  [@str8cashhomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/str8cashhomie)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 8:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/847 "2020-02-03T20:37:23Z")
> [@Ravenman](#):
>
> There is a law against releasing other people’s tax returns. Just like there’s a law against holding up congressional approved spending. Just like there’s a law against lying under oath.
>
> (I’m starting to come to the opinion that we SHOULD be removing more presidents from office!)
So the holding up congressionally approved spending is an example where I think if a president announced it as public policy, and just left it up for a watchdog to review it that’s fine. It’s essentially like being CEO and ordering your organization to do something that eventually gets shut down by regulators - I don’t think you should personally be held criminally responsible for it. I only think you should be held criminally responsible for it if you knowingly defied or deceived regulators.
The issue is that personally I want presidents who are willing to go as far as they can legally, which may enter into territory where you end up in a fine line between legal and illegal, and not to have to worry that if you step a toe over the line you could get impeached.
I may have been focusing too much on congress however, it probably would just come down to oversight of existing laws.
Additionally we are sort of in an odd place because allowing presidents to not have to worry about stepping a toe over the line means that you can end up living over the line, and doing things like suspending habeas corpus for years before there are any consequences.
---
### Author:  [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/848 "2020-02-03T21:10:29Z")
> [@str8cashhomie](#):
>
> So the holding up congressionally approved spending is an example where I think if a president announced it as public policy, and just left it up for a watchdog to review it that’s fine. It’s essentially like being CEO and ordering your organization to do something that eventually gets shut down by regulators - I don’t think you should personally be held criminally responsible for it. I only think you should be held criminally responsible for it if you knowingly defied or deceived regulators.
I am trying to not make this sound like an insult, but each time I type it, I’m stumped how to make it more polite. So I’m just going to do the best I can:
Are you familiar with the facts of the case in which Trump illegally withheld the Ukraine aid? I’ve just re-read your post several times, and it just sort of seems to have no connection with how anything works in government.
> [@](#):
>
> The issue is that personally I want presidents who are willing to go as far as they can legally, which may enter into territory where you end up in a fine line between legal and illegal, and not to have to worry that if you step a toe over the line you could get impeached.
Like, say, illegal and warrantless wiretapping by the Bush Administration? That’s the kind of thing you think Presidents should do?
---
### Author:  [@enipla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/enipla)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/849 "2020-02-03T22:30:02Z")
> [@str8cashhomie](#):
>
> …Additionally we are sort of in an odd place because allowing presidents to not have to worry about stepping a toe over the line means that you can end up living over the line, and doing things like suspending habeas corpus for years before there are any consequences.
Trump didn’t get caught speeding, he extorted an allied government. For personal gain.
This extortion was in the form of withholding money approved by congress. Money that would have helped Ukraine defend itself against an adversary of the US. The adversary that Trump has had 16 private meetings with, and the leader of which Trump looks to have financial ties to.
He’s fucking up our national security, and our allies trust in us.
This extortion and toe over the line is colloquially called treason.
---
### Author:  [@str8cashhomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/str8cashhomie)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/850 "2020-02-03T23:04:07Z")
> [@enipla](#):
>
> Trump didn’t get caught speeding, he extorted an allied government. For personal gain.
>
> This extortion was in the form of withholding money approved by congress. Money that would have helped Ukraine defend itself against an adversary of the US. The adversary that Trump has had 16 private meetings with, and the leader of which Trump looks to have financial ties to.
>
> He’s fucking up our national security, and our allies trust in us.
>
> This extortion and toe over the line is colloquially called treason.
Just to clarify both his extortion of Ukraine, his at least complicity in Russia illegally influencing our 2016 election, and his coverups of both of those scandals are impeachable for me 100% and he should have been removed from office already.
I just would put the basic act of being responsible for a policy that is done public and above board, but results in a watchdog or court declaring the policy illegal alone isn’t enough to impeach.
---
### Author:  [@str8cashhomie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/str8cashhomie)
#### Post date: [February 3, 2020, 11:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/851 "2020-02-03T23:19:30Z")
> [@Ravenman](#):
>
> Like, say, illegal and warrantless wiretapping by the Bush Administration? That’s the kind of thing you think Presidents should do?
No, I think that’s a bad policy that he shouldn’t have tried in the first place, and it being a constitutional violation, courts should have come down harder on the policy itself.
However for something I think is a good policy, like continuing to fund ACA subsidies after the GOP defunded them in order to try to kill the act, I want the president to fight for it until being made to stop.
---
### Author:  [@bobot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bobot)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/852 "2020-02-04T00:04:23Z")
After Trump The Lying Con Man is acquitted by the Senate, I’ll be glad that Schiff’s closing argument is preserved in the Congressional record. The Democrats did the right thing by history, that’s what they should have done.
> **[Watch Schiff deliver his closing remarks in the Senate impeachment trial](https://www.nbcnews.com/video/schiff-delivers-his-closing-remarks-in-the-senate-impeachment-trial-78028357970)**
>
> Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., delivered his closing remarks in the Senate impeachment trial, claiming how important removing President Trump from office would be.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/853 "2020-02-04T00:13:15Z")
As some intelligent and knowledgeable people have anticipated here in these pages, the beginnings of a move to censure.
> **[Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin calls for censuring Trump](https://www.axios.com/2020/02/03/manchin-trump-censure-impeachment-trial-ukraine)**
>
> Manchin said he sees no path to the 67 votes needed to remove the president from office.
**Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin calls for censuring Trump**
---
### Author:  [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/854 "2020-02-04T01:56:25Z")
> [@Guest-starring\_Id](#):
>
> Debating whether this should have been posted in Stupid Republican Idea of the Day thread…
> [Iowa Senator Joni Ernst warned Sunday that Republicans could immediately push to impeach Joe Biden over his work in Ukraine as vice president if he win the White House.](https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-02-02/ernst-warns-of-gop-push-to-impeach-biden-over-ukraine-if-he-wins)
>
> Indeed, a most erudite way to undertake this masterstroke of gotcha.
> [@Ravenman](#):
>
> Again, this whole idea that this impeachment sets a dangerous precedent is really nothing more than Trump’s defenders grasping at straws. …
The “warnings” (and the fake argument ‘oh noes impeachment will now be common!’) are indeed a grasping at straws, but they’re also a way to gauge the anxiety Trumpites feel about particular Democratic candidates.
‘_You’d better not nominate Biden because if you do, we’ll impeach him immediately!!!11!!_’ is rather a compliment to Biden. But the Trump-enablers will make the exact same argument about _every_ candidate who looks to be surging in the primary process. ‘_Better not vote for \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_!!!1!!!_’
And of course they’ll make the same threat about the eventual nominee. Doesn’t matter who it is. There will be _something_ “impeachable” about that person.
---
### Author:  [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 2:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/855 "2020-02-04T02:16:57Z")
> [@elucidator](#):
>
> As some intelligent and knowledgeable people have anticipated here in these pages, the beginnings of a move to censure.
>
> [https://www.axios.com/manchin-trump-censure-impeachment-trial-ukraine-fd1bee1b-9fb4-4f93-ad83-09eda336f14d.html](https://www.axios.com/manchin-trump-censure-impeachment-trial-ukraine-fd1bee1b-9fb4-4f93-ad83-09eda336f14d.html)
>
> **Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin calls for censuring Trump**
Ain’t gonna happen.
---
### Author:  [@Defensive\_Indifference](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Defensive_Indifference)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 2:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/856 "2020-02-04T02:28:16Z")
Oh, censure. Golly, that’ll teach him a lesson.
---
### Author:  [@jsc1953](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jsc1953)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 2:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/857 "2020-02-04T02:30:44Z")
It won’t teach him anything—he’s incapable of learning. But it will shut off the “complete exoneration” nonsense; plus it’ll put the Republicans in a tough spot.
---
### Author:  [@drad\_dog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drad_dog)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/858 "2020-02-04T02:32:55Z")
> [@Johnny\_L.A](#):
>
> Ain’t gonna happen.
Won’t matter. The public vote is the "happen"ing.
---
### Author:  [@Project\_Patahhh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Project_Patahhh)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/859 "2020-02-04T02:53:59Z")
Whenever the Democratic president gets impeached I look forward to the inevitable stonewalling and refusal to comply with Congressional subpoenas.
---
### Author:  [@ThelmaLou](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThelmaLou)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2020, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524/860 "2020-02-04T03:17:18Z")
> [@Project\_Patahhh](#):
>
> Whenever the Democratic president gets impeached I look forward to the inevitable stonewalling and refusal to comply with Congressional subpoenas.
Nah, the Democrats have principles, play fair, and don’t use the schoolyard bully tactics favored by the opposition. Some see this as a handicap, but I say, “Thank goodness, there are still some grown-ups in the room.”
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524.md?page=42)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-trump-impeachment-trial/846524.md?page=44)