The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age

    Impeachment? Mitch McConnell Could Ignore It

    US Constitution, Article One

    6: The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present.

    Current Senate Rules, on impeachment, from 1986:

    Whensoever  the  Senate  shall  receive  notice  from  th House  of  Representatives  that  managers  are  appointed  on their  part  to  conduct  an  impeachment  against  any  person and  are  directed  to  carry  articles  of  impeachment  to  the Senate,  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate  shall  immediately  in-form the House of Representatives that the Senate is ready to  receive  the  managers  for  the  purpose  of  exhibiting  such articles of impeachment, agreeably to such notice...


    Lawfare on how Mitch McConnell could just ignore a House impeachment of Trump, never have a trial, perhaps calling it a sinister, unwarranted, and unconstitutional partisan attack, not worthy of recognition:

    ..In this time of disregard and erosion of established institutional practices and norms, the current leadership of the Senate could choose to abrogate them once more. The same Mitch McConnell who blocked the Senate’s exercise of its authority to advise and consent to the Supreme Court nomination of Merrick Garland, could attempt to prevent the trial of a House impeachment of Donald Trump. And he would not have to look far to find the constitutional arguments and the flexibility to revise Senate rules and procedures to accomplish this purpose.

    The Constitution does not by its express terms direct the Senate to try an impeachment. In fact, it confers on the Senate "the sole power to try,” which is a conferral of exclusive constitutional authority and not a procedural command. The Constitution couches the power to impeach in the same terms: it is the House’s “sole power.” The House may choose to impeach or not, and one can imagine an argument that the Senate is just as free, in the exercise of its own “sole power,” to decline to try any impeachment that the House elects to vote...

    And, if McConnell acts like McConnell? Impeachment with zero followup by the Senate leads to a court fight?

    Lasting well into 2020? Finally making it to the Republican Supreme Court, full of right wingers and "textualism"? And said "text" in the Constitution does not mandate any time table to try an impeachment in the Senate?

    Impeachment would be a mark on Trump's legacy, but would it even last one week in the news cycle, or help remove Trump in the next election?



    Impeachment in the House is for the American people as well. If convincing, 1/4 of Mitch's Republican Senators will be out on their ass in 19 months. Ok, have to check those numbers to see how many incumbents up for re-election. That's 22 of 53 GOP seats up for re-election, over 40%, while only 12 Dem seats and 0 independents. Presumably some of these may be worried about a weak showing in the face of corruption, malfeasance and working with an enemy state.

    PS - Lindsey Graham may be full bore insane by re-election time:

    These are the type of tweets that need to go viral. I think nothing else could be more effective than helping get across that some conservative legal minds agree that some things in the Mueller report should be prosecuted. Liberals and Never Trumpers screaming about impeachment is basically howling at the moon.

    Whoever would like to see impeachment: now is not the time to be screaming about how nasty conservatives can be and how they are all evil. Now is the time to promote such messages like those of other allies. Turning coverage @ entities like Fox to be a more evenhanded mix of "exonerated" vs. "not exonerated" is crucial at this point in time. They will do both sides of GOP coverage if there is enough buzz. I am watching for conservative legal guys saying things like this precisely for this reason.  This in turn would affect the part of their audience who are not 100% true blue Trump fans. GOP Senators who might like to impeach if there was support need that support.

    I simply do not believe some of them wouldn't rather have Pence as president if it were easier for them to be behind that becoming reality.

    This is without getting into political strategy for Dems, whether impeachment would be good or bad on that front. There I am still open to all analysis points. But if you are one ot those who would like to see impeachment, it's a no brainer to be helping promote conservatives who see it as a reality. And not to treat them as an enemy at this time. It's really the only way impeachment can be effected, actually.

    It's in McConnell's interest to maintain the status quo, not to upturn the applecart as long as everyone is on message. Make it clear everyone's not on message, he doesn't have his status quo.

    Yeah, but Republicans and Republican voters don't give a crap about the witch hunt, or the 110 documented crimes or 35 convictions.

    Pelosi plan to just investigate financial crimes etc is likely better than an impeachment that McConnell lets die.

    The Senate has never removed a President from office by impeachment 

    No president has ever actually been removed from office by impeachment. The House impeached Andrew Johnson on 11 different counts in 1868, angry about how Abraham Lincoln’s successor was handling reconstruction after the Civil War, but he ultimately avoided Senate conviction by one vote. More than a century later, Richard Nixon resigned from office rather than face impeachment; in late 1998, in a highly partisan vote, the House impeached Bill Clinton on two counts, but he didn’t come close to being removed by the Senate—a lesson in overreach not lost on today’s Congress.



    This is why some are arguing censure is just as good. As it is a show for the record who didn't approve of what was happening. Same as impeachment without removal without the hassle of impeachment.

    "some" ....names of any House members? Pundits and opinion havers on twitter aren't relevant.

    The Constitution is already on life support, all we need is months of rehashing the Russian business, an impeachment, and McConnell throwing it in the wastebin with Merrick Garlands nomination.

    McConnell's up for reelection - good time to bring up his wife's money connections and gravy train in the Trump administration and McConnell's ties to the Russian-funded NRA... looking forward to next year's Derby - sometimes a long horse does win... over a tortoise?

    Why aren't there more people on the 25th Amendment bandwagon is actually what this enquiring mind wants to know. Everyday in every way there's a new example:

    at the raving and ranting early this morn, tweeting about enemies of the people getting down on their knees...

    Donald J. Trump ‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump 9 minutes ago

    I wonder if the New York Times will apologize to me a second time, as they did after the 2016 Election. But this one will have to be a far bigger & better apology. On this one they will have to get down on their knees & beg for forgiveness-they are truly the Enemy of the People!

    Donald J. Trump‏ Verified account @realDonaldTrump 17 minutes ago

    Paul Krugman, of the Fake News New York Times, has lost all credibility, as has the Times itself, with his false and highly inaccurate writings on me. He is obsessed with hatred, just as others are obsessed with how stupid he is. He said Market would crash, Only Record Highs!

    Edit to add:just now  topping those off with a little projection:

    Donald J. Trump‏Verified account @realDonaldTrump

    The Radical Left Democrats, together with their leaders in the Fake News Media, have gone totally insane! I guess that means that the Republican agenda is working. Stay tuned for more!

    6:18 AM - 23 Apr 2019

    I posted how Lindsey Graham also went off - a bunch of people just hitting the vortex of insanity in their little hate bubble - gonna be a fun next 6 months or more. and the 25th Amendment? that's been taken off the table, because a) Trump fired half the administration that'd be needed & replaced them with acting, b) even the act of discussing the 25th Amendment is now grounds for termination, as the rather curious Rod Rosenstein's situation revealed - he rather bent over backwards after that to hold onto his job.

    Pelosi says no again:

    On tonight's CNN Town Halls with Dem candidates, the first three were asked about impeachment:

    Still to come:

    Bernie makes very good points, good no matter who gets the nomination.

    Warren hasn't got the tip off that "Senate rules and tradition destroying" Mitch will flush the impeachment down the Potomac, so no senator will have to, or be able to, vote on it.

    This is why I still like Avenatti in the political ring - he wouldn't be walking scared over some corrupt cornpone turtle neck assholl - he'd just roll him over and find where he's softest. What does Mitch see as his strength? Take that on. We just keep letting Republicans think they're too tough to confront. We're just giving it up to them. What did AOC do when Mitch went pruvate? She went knocking on closet doors in the Senate asking, "is Mitch here?" Brilliant - draw the turtle out of his shell - he can't hide in the Senate forever.

    Just an interesting point:

    The small investors are coming back in. WooHoo. The US has debt cycles, not business cycles, and junk debt and most other debt is at record levels.

    Irrational exuberance?.... a 56,000% rise in Zoom Technologies, happens to be the wrong Zoom

    Not irrational - Zoom's good stuff. It's a disturbing lack of attention to basic detail.
    Then again, Zoom only has a profit of $7million on $300m revenue, so where the $15 billion market cap or $66/share valuation comes from is likely the more irrational exhuberance.
    Meanwhile, Zoom Tech's market cap is now $7 million, so while they don't sell anything, it's just a few mistaken investors.

    But yeah, companies have been dying on the ramparts of video conferencing and teleconferncing for decades - Microsoft's half-ass Lynx which they merged into Skype, Cisco & Polycom's entrants - now we're back to hyping how much money there will be in video, but at the end of the day, more people will use Facetime for free than any paid product.

    If you read the link, the 56,000% rise Zoom was not the real legit Zoom .

    Yes, I read it - penny stoc to $2.60 a share - what did I write that made you think I didn't?

    (Note I mention both Zoom - Zoom Video - and Zoom Tech)

    " Not irrational - Zoom's good stuff."

    One Zoom may be good stuff, other Zoom isn't good stuff.

    Obviously not  "exuberance" - a simple obvious mistake. Rational as well, even if not terribly clever.

    Hillary is backing Nancy's approach

    BTW, to finish what went on @ the CNN Town Halls: Kamala Harris, like Liz Warren, came out for impeachment, while Mayor Pete said it is "pretty clear that he deserves impeachment," when asked if would support moving forward with proceedings against Trump. But he said he is "going to leave it to the House and Senate to figure that out." "My role in the process is trying to relegate Trumpism to the dust bin of history" via the ballot box, Buttigieg said. 

    Hillary published a full op-ed on topic @ WaPo:

    Hillary's op-ed is currently #1 most read article @ WaPo.

    They have this summary video at top of the article, it may be free to watch so I will post it here separately, I am not sure to because I am a subscriber:

    Usually one can find the most popular WaPo op-eds eventually re-published by sister papers where there isn't a paywall.

    This NBC reporter manage to snag some words on topic from Pence (found retweeted by Maggie Haberman):

    The Republicans love Trump,  tax cuts for the rich, trash EPA, increase defense $$ etc. so IT'S OK!

    They hated Nixon, too liberal. So they let the Dems loose on him. pre-Watergate, August, '71: Time:

    Disowning Richard Nixon, his right-wing former supporters carefully point out, is a decision reluctantly reached. After all, one does not toss off an old ally and champion without shedding tears for what once had been. But the moderate tone of Richard Nixon's presidency—while not liberal enough to satisfy critics in the center or on the left —has so disturbed many of his conservative backers that he appears to be in some danger of alienating a constituency he has counted as his for 25 years. Welfare reform, cutbacks in defense spending.....EPA, OSHA, index SS to inflation, Clean Water Act...

    In that vein, it is interesting that this Never Trumper GOP group has decided to use Senator Graham as a target, no? They could just as easily used another anti-Trump meme for an ad and left Lindsey to his games unremarked, along the lines of "a GOP guy's gotta do what he's gotta do".  It will be interesting to see if they target other Senators, as in: the guys who run an impeachment trial.

    Chuck and Nancy want to ignore it for a while too? Is the work of those guys over there? Chuck/Nancy ready to pretend it's not happening?

    FWIW, there's a list of star Dems who don't want to be in the Senate and it just gained Stacey Abrams:

    Lots of top-tier Dems apparently saying thanks but no thanks to senate bids.

    — Garrett Haake (@GarrettHaake) April 30, 2019

    Former GOP House member:

    Act Blue has a PAC raising money to  DESTROY Mitch. Just thought you might like to know.

    Latest Comments