DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Trump Impeachment 2.0

Republicans gauge support for Trump impeachment

House Democrats are charging ahead this week to impeach President Trump anew for his role in Wednesday’s attack on the U.S. Capitol — and this time they might have some GOP support.

No House Republicans crossed the aisle 13 months ago when Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and her caucus impeached Trump for leveraging U.S. aid to pressure Ukrainian officials to investigate his rival, President-elect Joe Biden.

But last week’s violent siege of the Capitol by pro-Trump supporters — an assault that occurred with Congress in session and Vice President Pence presiding — has infuriated a host of GOP lawmakers, some of whom are now considering support for the ensuing impeachment charge, which Democrats introduced on Monday.

The resolution, which charges Trump with “inciting violence against the Government of the United States,” will hit the House floor on Wednesday. And a number of Republicans have suggested they might be on board.

Centrist Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), an Iraq and Afghanistan war vet who’s clashed with Trump, has signaled support for impeachment.

"I'll vote the right way, you know, if I'm presented with that,” Kinzinger said Sunday on ABC’s “This Week” program. “I just think it's probably not the smartest move right now, but I think that's going to be out of my hands."

A day later, after the article of impeachment was introduced, Kinzinger's spokesman struck a harsher tone and indicated the Illinois Republican may very well vote with Democrats.

“Congressman Kinzinger is committed to doing what is right, no matter the political cost. What President Trump did last week was incite violence and encourage a mob to attack the United States Capitol. Clearly, the President violated his oath of office and is unfit to serve," the spokesman said in a statement.

Kinzinger won re-election in November by 29 percentage points.

Republicans are closely watching moderate House GOP members facing tough reelections in 2022, including Tuesday Group Co-Chairs John Katko (N.Y) and Fred Upton (Mich.), as well as Reps. Jaime Herrera Beutler (Wash.) and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.).

GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney (Wyo.), a Trump critic who opposed Republican efforts to overturn the certification of Biden’s election victory, has not yet said how she will vote. But on a conference call Monday, Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) told fellow House Republicans he opposed impeachment.

House Democrats are racing to adopt the new impeachment charge in the short window before Jan. 20, when Trump is scheduled to leave office. The resolution was formally introduced by Democratic Reps. David Cicilline (R.I.), Ted Lieu (Calif.), Jamie Raskin (Md.) and Jerry Nadler (N.Y.). Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) announced later on Monday that the House will rush the resolution to the floor Wednesday.

“We have a president who most of us believe participated in encouraging an insurrection, an act on this building and on democracy and trying to subvert the counting of the presidential ballot,” Hoyer told reporters in the Capitol on Monday morning.

For many first-term Republicans, Wednesday’s impeachment roll call will be the first major vote of their congressional career. Several of the lawmakers, including Reps. Nancy Mace (R-S.C.) and Peter Meijer (R-Mich.), are furious over the Capitol assault and have blamed GOP colleagues for pushing to overturn the election without basis.

“When it comes to impeachment, it’s something we’re strongly considering at this point. … What we saw on Wednesday left the president unfit for office,” Meijer told WXMI, the Fox affiliate in Grand Rapids.

But Mace said she was worried impeachment could inflame partisan tensions that are already at a boiling point.

“We were sitting ducks in the halls of Congress. … Everyone was put at risk, unnecessarily so,” Mace told CNN on Sunday, adding that “we have to hold the president accountable for what happened.”

But she has called on Biden to urge Democrats to back off impeachment, warning, “We need to be very careful about the rhetoric, about being divisive right now in the next 10 days.”

The comments highlight the dilemma facing Republicans after Wednesday’s shocking attack on the Capitol complex. On one hand, GOP lawmakers want to burnish their law-and-order bona fides by holding those responsible for the violent siege to account. On the other, they don’t want to alienate the party’s conservative base, which remains largely loyal to the president, and risk the backlash in the form of either a primary challenge or a threat to their personal safety.

Some Republicans on the Hill said there’s another consideration for GOP lawmakers still on the fence: how their vote will look if Trump incites more violence and bloodshed leading up to Inauguration Day or in the months to come.

“That was always something we knew we would have to grapple with after the election: what to do about Trump,” said one Republican source on the Hill. “The events of the past week have revealed that Trumpism is not the future of the Republican Party. We have to say who we are, what we stand for and how we can win.”

House Democrats are expected to pass their impeachment article easily Wednesday, regardless of how many Republicans join them. The terrifying assault on the Capitol has unified Democrats of all stripes, from liberal members of "the squad" to conservative-leaning Blue Dogs, all of whom say Trump’s refusal to acknowledge his election defeat — combined with his entreaty to supporters to march on the Capitol and “fight like hell” to overturn the results — fueled the tensions leading to the violent breach.

It remains unclear, however, when House Democrats will send the article to the Senate — an issue that seems to be dividing the caucus.

Several prominent Democrats, including Hoyer and Cicilline, said Monday that they want to deliver the resolution across the Capitol immediately after passage, setting the stage for Senate action just as Biden takes office.

But others, including Rep. James Clyburn (S.C.), the Democratic whip, have suggested the better plan would be to hold the article in the House to allow Biden the time to seat his Cabinet in the earliest stages of his new administration — a process that might be disrupted by an impeachment trial.

There’s virtually no chance the Senate would convict Trump, which requires support from two-thirds of the upper chamber. But it is likely that the number of supportive Republicans would increase relative to a year ago, when only Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) broke ranks and backed one of the two Democratic impeachment articles related to Trump’s Ukraine dealings.

This time around, Romney could be joined by other moderate Republicans fed up with the turmoil of the Trump years, and furious with the president’s role in stirring up Wednesday’s mob. That list includes Sens. Lisa Murkowski (Alaska) and Ben Sasse (Neb.).

“I will definitely consider whatever articles they might move,” Sasse told CBS over the weekend.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/533720-republicans-gauge-support-for-trump-impeachment

The senate trial be held in a dem controlled senate so they’ll hear all the witnesses this time. Pence can end the bleeding but he’s trump whipping boy and he evidently likes being whipped.

I think a handful of Republican senators and a bunch of house republicans are going to get censured or removed too. Pelosi brought up the 14th amendment in dealing with what to do with them.

Gotta admit, I'm no fan of Trump, but this seems like it's not worth it to me.

I do think that his actions are best handled after he leaves office..

It’s worth it. It keeps him from drawing his lifetime pension. It cut him off from lifetime secret service details too. Let him go back to being a private citizen without further grifting the American tax payers. Lastly it keeps him from ever holding office again. Kneecapping him and his crazy followers thinking he’ll be back in 2024.

He needs to be taken down as quickly as the capital was breached.
It disgusts me 90 percent of republicans are not on board with defending the constitution.

I'm not sure it does anything but keep him from seeking office again, according to fact checkers on FB. BUT letting him slide sets a precedent that we just can not have... what happens when the next would be dictator comes along and is actually smart enough to pull something like this off successfully? You can't let it just stand.

Sasse with his speech in the Senate after the riot cleared and his words since have captured my attention, in a positive way. I'm always skeptical when it comes to politicians, but pleased when you juxtapose him with a guy like Cruz or Hawley.

j/c

I think the American people deserve the truth. Whatever that truth turns out to be. While this may not be a popular idea, I'm hoping the senate waits until Biden is president to hold the impeachment trial.

My reasoning for that is that as long as Trump is president, he holds the power to withhold witnesses based on Executive Privilege. It's the very tool he used to stop any first hand witnesses from testifying during his first impeachment. As long as he holds the power to prevent the people from knowing the truth he will use it.

Once he is no longer president he loses that privilege and the raw truth can come out.

I think its up to the House when to send it to the senate

Until the newly elected senators take the oath of office, it will be up to McConnell when the senate decides to hear it. According to current information available, McConnell wouldn't bring it to the floor of the senate until January 19th. One day before Trump leaves office.

Mitch McConnell outlines what a second Trump impeachment trial might look like

https://www.vox.com/2021/1/9/22179004/mitch-mcconnell-memo-second-trump-impeachment-senate-trial

The Democrats actually take control of the senate on Jan. 20th and it could take as long as until Jan. 22.

Democrats likely to get Senate control on Jan. 20, though it may take until Jan. 22

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/democr...-22-11610139670

It takes a two thirds majority of the senate to vote to remove a president from office. Trump will no longer be in office but that same two thirds rule still applies for an impeachment conviction.

You can pretty much bet that will never happen. But with Trump no longer having executive privilege, the entire story and truth of everything that has gone on can be shown. Actual witnesses can make that happen. Trump used his Executive Privilege in the first impeachment trial to prevent that from happening.

Pitt

I want the truth but I rather have his pardon privileges taken away before he pardons himself, his corrupt family, and all his corrupt cronies.

That's never going to happen. Even if he feels the senate is going to vote to remove him, he'll just pardon his family and cronies before they vote to remove him.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/...t-from-d-c-riot

LOL trump’s bank is cutting ties and closing his accounts. Rut row. Guess the Germans don’t want to be seen as financing the trump coup.

They have history with which to base such a decision on.

j/c...

Finally realizing they crossed the line.

j/c...

While I'm ready for Trump to be out of office, I'm glad Pence won't invoke the 25th... I think that's a really bad precedent to set...

I do think he needs to be impeached again... I'm just hoping that the unrest that is sure to come in the next couple of weeks is controlled...

I think the real objective is to prevent Trump from ever holding office again.

I don’t know if there is a way to do that outside of impeachment or a conviction of insurrection or sedition that would kick in the 14th amendment but that would limit his future.

The real objective is two fold.

1) Stop him from ever running for office again.

2) Ruin his legacy

That's it and that's all.

Trump has spent the past 4 years cementing his legacy. A 2nd impeachment is going to do nothing but add to it's splendor.

GOP should have simply manned up and used the 25th - then it would have been clear and simple.

Now we've given Trump a platform to do one of the things he does best which is cry victim.

I'd personally love for him to run again in 2024 and split the Republican vote.

j/c...

This video. Oh boy.

This should be easily confirmed/rejected by reviewing videotapes. I would imagine that's part of the investigation that's already underway.

I'm sure the FBI is doing just that. Visitors logs as well.

James Clyburn had these comments:

Kyle Griffin
@kylegriffin1
Rep. James Clyburn on CNN: "I have an unmarked office that you have got to know exactly where it is."

"For some reason, these [rioters] showed up at that office ... They didn't go to where my name was ... That to me indicates that something untoward may have been going on."

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1348336303167983617

And this snippet from an article from the Boston Globe:

As people rushed out of other buildings on the Capitol grounds, staffers in Pressley’s office barricaded the entrance with furniture and water jugs that had piled up during the pandemic. Groh pulled out gas masks and looked for the special panic buttons in the office.

“Every panic button in my office had been torn out — the whole unit,” she said, though they could come up with no rationale as to why. She had used them before and hadn’t switched offices since then. As they were escorted to several different secure locations, Groh and Pressley and her husband tried to remain calm and vigilant — not only of rioters but of officers they did not know or trust, she said.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/01/13/n...tts-delegation/

Fallout from this will be interesting to follow..

Agreed - was my first thought also ... and to be 100% honest I hope it's not true, but I will not be at all surprised if it is true. Like always, anyone helping people to break the law need to be punished to the full extent of the law.

I would much prefer they skip the hype-building and just make announcements when they have their ducks in a row. The #1 reason we're in this mess is because person(s) went off making very serious accusations without (ever) presenting any evidence.

Was just about to write something similar.... and it directly relates to the impeachment. Gather and present the FACTS and EVIDENCE - then proceed. Don't sensationalize and don't rush to judgement based on snippets.

That would be presuming that you think the FBI is trying to "hype" what happened rather than give people a glimpse of what actually happened.

We have people trying to say it really wasn't that bad. We have people saying it was just some wild mob that really didn't know what they were doing.

I see the FBI statement as letting Americans know that wasn't what this was at all. I don't think they can present evidence to be used in trials, that will be used to connect things together to the public at this point.

But they can damned well let us know that this attack on the capital went much deeper than we know and it was far more planned than some would lead us to believe. I'm glad they let us know that and to help tamper the "let's just move on" crowd.

Not talking about the FBI statements or the Military statements.

I am talking about the other stuff.

Got it.

Justice was never the goal for you people.

j/c...

Even an attempted overthrow of our government won't help to remove your blinders.

Whatever dude. Holding Trump accountable for his words, actions and incompetence was never YOUR goal.

What was the goal when you insinuated AOC performing a sexual act on you?

You lack credibility, Peen. Give it up.