Trump Impeachment Outcome Possibilities…

Possible impeachment scenarios in abbreviated and bullet format. Article excerpts taken from Vox.

1) Trump doesn’t get impeached

The House has not yet voted to impeach Trump. The big swing among House moderates was in favor of launching an “impeachment inquiry” not of impeaching Trump per se.

2) Trump could be forced to resign

Richard Nixon is the only president to have been forced from office by scandal rather than death, but he’s not one of the two presidents who’ve been impeached by the US House of Representatives.

Instead, a delegation of Republican members of Congress — including the minority leaders of the House and Senate, plus conservative icon Barry Goldwater — came to the White House and told Nixon his support in Congress had evaporated. The leaders of both the Republican Party as an institution and the conservative movement were looking to safeguard their own long-term interests and not go down with the rapidly sinking Nixon administration. Faced with that reality, Nixon chose to resign.

3) Mitch McConnell could spike the trial

A trial of Donald Trump would take place in a chamber controlled by his GOP allies. If it doesn’t suit their interests to have extended arguments and presentation of evidence, they don’t need to do that. A quick, party-line vote to acquit could be all we get. Given everything we know about Trump-era politics, this seems like one of the most likely scenarios.

4) A rigorous trial leads to a party-line acquittal

One has to assume that if Trump has his Senate caucus solidly behind him, its members will vote to greatly curtail the trial and move forward.

But, in theory, Senate Republicans could decide they want to go through a whole extended trial and then acquit Trump on a party-line vote. If that happens, then legally speaking nothing happens — Trump just stays president. Democrats might fall into infighting, arguing that if the party leadership had taken a different tactical approach (a broad impeachment inquiry rather than a narrowly Ukraine-focused one, for example) the outcome might have been different.

5) Trump is acquitted, despite an anti-Trump majority

Another possibility is that the Ukraine scandal ends up playing out somewhat similarly to the Affordable Care Act repeal where a small number of Republican senators joined forces with Democrats to secure a majority.

You could imagine the GOP’s vulnerable Senate incumbents — Martha McSally (R-AZ), Cory Gardner (R-CO), and Susan Collins (R-ME) — plus occasional Trump critics Sens. Mitt Romney (R-UT) and Ben Sasse (R-NE) force a real trial and ultimately produce a majority vote in favor of conviction.

Except the Constitution requires 67 votes — not 51 — to remove a president, so that would count as an acquittal.

6) The GOP splits, and Trump is removed from office

Under this scenario, Trump still holds on to his true base (the roughly half of GOP primary voters who backed him in 2016) but becomes so unpopular with the public that he suffers mass defections from GOP senators leading to his removal from office.

For obvious reasons, it’s difficult to imagine this happening. The Republican establishment didn’t like Trump and doesn’t like everything he does, but he’s fundamentally delivered for them on all their key priorities.

7) Pence is complicit, and he’s removed too

One reason Watergate ended up working out so badly for Nixon is that, sort of by coincidence, his original vice president had been driven from office by an unrelated scandal. Consequently, at the time of maximum peril for Nixon, the VP was Gerald Ford — a well-regarded Republican who genuinely had nothing to do with the Nixon White House or any of its crimes.

By contrast, Pence — like other modern VPs — is himself a senior member of the Trump administration.

8) The Presidential Succession Act might be unconstitutional

Many scholars believe that the speaker (and the president pro temp of the Senate) as a member of Congress is not an “officer” under the meaning of the Constitution. It might be good for the Supreme Court to offer its view on this before it needs to be litigated in the middle of a huge national crisis, but America’s top court does not offer advisory opinions choosing instead to rule only on actual controversies. So we’ll never find out if the court will strike this provision down until it actually happens. But suffice it to say it might, in which case Secretary of State Mike Pompeo becomes president.

9) President Steve Mnuchin

The problem with the President Pompeo scenario is that he’s implicated in the scandal even more clearly than Pence.

He was on the infamous call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. But he feigned ignorance about it and only later admitted he was on the call after press reports exposed him. He used to be all for congressional oversight of the State Department when he was in the House and now says questions about the administration’s conduct toward the European nation amounts to “bullying.” And instead of standing by the ambassador to Ukraine, he let the president recall her seemingly for personal reasons.

If by some remarkable turn of fortune, Congress decides it needs to purge everyone involved with the scandal then it’s going to need to remove Mike Pompeo.

For the detailed article by Matthew Yglesias continue on BELOW the FOLD.

As the Pressure Continues to Mount…

More good news on the Trump front.

A federal judge in New York City spiked President Donald Trump’s attempt to block a Manhattan prosecutor from obtaining his tax and financial records from the accounting firm Mazars, dismissing his “extraordinary” claim to be immune from criminal investigation.

In a 75-page ruling on Monday, Judge Victor Marrero, also issued a sharp rejection of longstanding Department of Justice opinions that say a president cannot be indicted or criminally prosecuted while in office, calling their conclusions “not warranted” or backed up by the authority of the courts.

Marrero said Trump’s claim of “absolute immunity” from criminal proceedings is counter to the intent of the framers of the Constitution, who rejected an executive with the limitless power of a monarch. Marrero described the president’s argument as “repugnant to the nation’s governmental structure and constitutional values.”

In addition, the effort by Trump to scuttle the city prosecutor’s subpoena would protect any potential accomplices from facing justice while Trump remained in office, Marrero noted — a sweeping claim of immunity that could result in Trump and his allies being above the law. Similar arguments have been soundly and repeatedly rejected by the Supreme Court and other federal judges, he ruled.

“The notion of … presidential immunity from judicial process that the President here invokes, unqualified and boundless in its reach described above, cuts against the grain of these Constitutional precedents,” wrote Marrero, an appointee of President Bill Clinton in 1999.


As expected Trump’s legal team immediately filed an “emergency appeal”.

All good things come in time. Trump’s time will come and when it does America will finally be relieved of its national nightmare.

17 Percent Of Trump Supporters Who May Break With The Donald…

Those of us who support impeachment don’t deny that there is a “Trump base” but insist that mountains of polling evidence show that it amounts to 25 to 30 percent of voters at most. The rest of the 46 percent who voted for Trump have real doubts about who he is, how he behaves and what he is doing to our country. Even those of us who disagree with them on a variety of issues see this substantial part of Trump’s constituency as made up of rational and engaged citizens open to persuasion.

In prior posts this site has readily stated that the Trump apologists/cultists are void of any ability to reason and use rational thought processes. The Trump apologist/cultist are, just like their cult leader, driven by raw emotionalism and blind faith. We continue to stand by our judgement.

The 25 to 30 percent of Trump supporters the author of the above excerpt refers to is the same percentage this site readily refers to as Trump apologists/cultists and irrational thinkers. Nothing will convince this group of anti American that their leader is both intellectually and emotionally unfit to hold the office of the president of the United States. They are completely immune to reason and rational thinking.

The 24 percent are the folks you see at the Trump rallies. Trump’s more tepid approvers (17 percent of registered voters in this survey) tend to stay home, take in the news and ask questions about what’s going on.

The big gap between strong approvers and strong disapprovers was very predictive of the 2018 election turnout that gave Democrats control of the House. Those elections showed that many who voted for Trump in 2016 were prepared to vote for Democrats two years later. This was a telling sign that a sizable share of Trump’s voters are not lockstep apologists.

It is likely that the 17 percent will ultimately choose to support the democratic candidate over Trump in the 2020 election cycle. Why? Because they are among the real Americans who know Trump has wrought grave damage to our republic with his divisiveness, his undermining of our institutions of government, and his damage to our credibility on the international stage. These are the folks who with democrats will turn Trump out in 2020. Assuming he is not impeached by the House and removed by the Senate first.

An NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll conducted Sept. 13 to 16, before the White House readout of Trump’s Ukraine call was released, found a relatively high 45 percent saying they approved of Trump’s performance. But only 30 percent said they had “very positive” feelings toward him, and only 25 percent said they both liked Trump personally and approved of most of his policies.

Again, it is the 25 percent that this site refers to as Trump apologists/cultists. The folks who regardless of the facts and evidence of Trump’s disregard for the Constitution and his lawlessness will continue to support him. These are the folks Trump himself was referring to when he said he could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and get away with it.

More of the quoted article BELOW the FOLD

Trump Thinks it’s a Coup… It Is Not

Something for the Trump apologists and cultists to read and hopeful UNDERSTAND. Although it is becoming ever more doubtful whether understanding anything rational is even possible for the Trump apologists/cultists.

President Trump has called the commencement of an impeachment inquiry a “coup.” This sentiment has been echoed—actually, it was road-tested for Trump—by some of his more loyal apologists. This line of argument is as foolish as it is irresponsible.

The constitutionally-defined process of impeachment and a “coup” have one thing in common: They are attempts to replace a sitting president. All similarity ends there.

A “coup” is not a gauzy, ill-defined term, like “beauty” or “perfect.” It has a very specific meaning pertaining to government. A coup—short for coup d’état, literally “a blow of state”—is a sudden, violent, and illegal seizure of power, usually performed by the military, though sometimes carried out by armed forces outside of the government’s chain of command.

Here is one thing the leaders of coups do not do: Give the sitting president a heads up during a nationally televised press conference, which is what Speaker Nancy Pelosi has done.

Here is a second thing the leaders of coups do not do: Give the president’s party a voting stake in the question of whether or not the president shall be forced to step down.

Here is a third thing the leaders of coups do not do: Agree beforehand to allow the president to remain in office if he satisfies pre-arranged conditions transparently laid out in a 230-year-old document.

We could keep going on and on. And on. But you get the point.

There is no universe—none—in which impeachment could reasonably be construed as a “coup.”


In the trumpian alternative universe any and everything Trump utters from his gaping maw is considered absolute truth by both Trump and his apologists/cultists.

They are all wrong. Egregiously so.