Scrutable

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 4:25 pm**

I'd believe any of that if there was the merest hint of division among the Reps. The Dems need to get this over as quickly as possible.

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 4:35 pm**

My guess is Romney wouldn't stand alone. But Collins could join him. And Murkowski is a possible. There must be a good chance 3 will join Romney's camp - there's a respectable chance Romney will be president someday.

Of the 2020 at-risk cohort, Cory Gardner surely can't win reelection in 2020 in CO as a Trump cultist, Martha McSally in AZ probably won't get primaried and is in a 50/50 state. Then there's Joni Ernst in Iowa - heading to a loss anyway. The NC and GA guys must be a bit nervous too. Or maybe there's possibles in the safe 2020 cohort - can some alienate the Trump cultists because they are too secure in their state GOP? Got the backing of the Christian extremists, say? Or Sasse in Nebraska - he's already got a primary challenge from a Trump cultist because he's been negative on Trump throughout - so why not take it head on by joining Romney?

Then there's retirees. Lamar Alexander from Tennessee - an old school Conservative who must loathe Trump. Plus 3 more old school retirees.

The 2022 and 2024 cohorts don't need to worry about primary challenges right now. How hard is it to vote for a trial?

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 4:37 pm**

GeenDienst wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 11, 2020 4:25 pm
I'd believe any of that if there was the merest hint of division among the Reps. The Dems need to get this over as quickly as possible.

You obviously haven't been paying much attention, if you've not noticed the division between the Romney group and the rest. Remember, it only takes 4 out of 53 Senators for a trial, and if there's a trial the evidence is devastating.

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 4:52 pm**

of course, if the whole thing isn't dismissed, the Republicans control the process.

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:16 pm**

What are you trying to say? What does "dismissed" mean? What does "control the process" mean? Who are "the Republicans" in this context?

There's no point in jumping to the most likely outcome - acquittal after a faked trial, say 50% chance - without going into the nuances of the other possibilities.

As a guess it could be something like the following, but nobody really knows.

50% faked trial, acquittal
25% partial trial, acquittal
10% proper trial acquittal
10% proper trial, ill-health resignation
5% proper trial, removal

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:45 pm**

As long as you're enjoying yourself.

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 6:40 pm**

lpm wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:16 pm
50% faked trial, acquittal
25% partial trial, acquittal
10% proper trial acquittal
10% proper trial, ill-health resignation
5% proper trial, removal

Most of that depends on your definitions of faked, partial, and proper, but I don't think there's any realistic definition of proper that has only a 2 in 5 chance of acquittal.

Posted: **Sat Jan 11, 2020 7:25 pm**

By proper, I'm thinking of a trial where the managers can subpoena any and all witnesses, subpoena documents, and where the senators take the oath.

This then gives Republican Senators their cover. Of the 53, only 10 are fervent cultists, believing him the messiah. Another 10 are controlled via various means. 30 are terrified by the cult and don't dare cross it - but would much rather have power under President Pence. They are stupid - they know their pact with the devil works for now, but can explode in their faces in the 2020 races under an incapacitated Trump.

I think the chances of conviction are underestimated, in general, plus the chance of the threat of conviction being used to ill-health-resignation him.

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:44 am**

lpm wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 11, 2020 4:35 pm
My guess is Romney wouldn't stand alone. But Collins could join him. And Murkowski is a possible. There must be a good chance 3 will join Romney's camp - there's a respectable chance Romney will be president someday.

Of the 2020 at-risk cohort, Cory Gardner surely can't win reelection in 2020 in CO as a Trump cultist, Martha McSally in AZ probably won't get primaried and is in a 50/50 state. Then there's Joni Ernst in Iowa - heading to a loss anyway. The NC and GA guys must be a bit nervous too. Or maybe there's possibles in the safe 2020 cohort - can some alienate the Trump cultists because they are too secure in their state GOP? Got the backing of the Christian extremists, say? Or Sasse in Nebraska - he's already got a primary challenge from a Trump cultist because he's been negative on Trump throughout - so why not take it head on by joining Romney?

Then there's retirees. Lamar Alexander from Tennessee - an old school Conservative who must loathe Trump. Plus 3 more old school retirees.

The 2022 and 2024 cohorts don't need to worry about primary challenges right now. How hard is it to vote for a trial?

At the unlikely end of "at risk" for 2020 is Mitch himself, who rarely gets a positive approval rating in Kentucky.

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:17 am**

bolo wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 11, 2020 6:40 pm

lpm wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 11, 2020 5:16 pm
50% faked trial, acquittal
25% partial trial, acquittal
10% proper trial acquittal
10% proper trial, ill-health resignation
5% proper trial, removal
Most of that depends on your definitions of faked, partial, and proper, but I don't think there's any realistic definition of proper that has only a 2 in 5 chance of acquittal.

The outcome of a fair trial isn't 50% guilty 50% innocent because it isn't a random process.

I think in this case any non-partisan process intending to uphold the law would definitely find Trump guilty, given that he has repeatedly admitted that he is in public. So if anything, I would think lpm is overestimating the likelihood that a proper trial would lead to acquittal - except that even what we're dubbing a 'proper' trial in fact has such an openly corrupt jury that it would be deemed a mistrial if any other citizen in the country were the defendant.

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 2:27 pm**

This isn't a civil trial. There is no requirement or expectation for a nonpartisan process. The chance of that happening is 0%.

LPM has given her definition of proper:

lpm wrote: ↑
Sat Jan 11, 2020 7:25 pm
By proper, I'm thinking of a trial where the managers can subpoena any and all witnesses, subpoena documents, and where the senators take the oath.

Fwiw, my estimate would be something like

60% show trial, acquittal
35% partially legit trial, acquittal
4% proper trial, acquittal
0.5% resignation to avoid proper trial
0.5% proper trial, removal

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:22 pm**

But it's election year, with the Republicans highly likely to lose the Presidency and the House, and the Senate touch and go - because they are led by a hated incompetent who commits crimes and has dementia. Trump was never a Republican and the party has been wrecked by entryism by his cultists. This is their only chance to replace him before election day. President Pence might not win, but he could save them the Senate, which is a big part of what Senators care about.

Only about 20 of them are partisan in the sense of being pro-Trump. The rest are partisan in the sense of being pro-power. They could suddenly switch to their back-up plan for power, rather than stick with the risky status quo. One or two might even be pro-country, and see the need to stop a confused lunatic from starting wars.

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:44 pm**

A reminder of the Senate in 2020. Currently 53-47, so +3 to win (plus the Vice Presidency). 35 contests, 23 Republican and 12 Democrat. Based on current polls:

Democrats:

1 Lose: Doug Jones, Alabama

11 Win: New Hampshire, Virginia, Michigan, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Illinois, New Jersey, Delaware, Rhode Island, Massachusetts

Republicans:

2 Lose:
Cory Gardner, Colorado
Susan Collins, Maine

3 At risk:
Joni Ernst, Iowa
Thom Tillis, North Carolina
Martha McSally, Arizona

5 Only at risk in a freak outcome:

Mitch McConnell, Kentucky
Lindsey Graham, South Carolina
John Cornyn, Texas
Dan Sullivan, Alaska
Kansas

13 Win: Wyoming, Idaho, Oklahoma, South Dakota, West Virginia, Tennessee, Arkansas, Nebraska, Montana, Louisiana, Mississippi, Georgia x2

An acquittal and Trump at the top of the ticket has to be the dream outcome for the Democrats. Ill-health-resignation and President Pence has to be the best option for the Republicans.

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:04 pm**

But that assumes any Republican senator who viewed to convict Trump would survive a primary challenge. For most of them, the general election is not the worrying bit of the electoral process.

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:24 pm**

Squeak wrote: ↑
Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:04 pm
But that assumes any Republican senator who viewed to convict Trump would survive a primary challenge. For most of them, the general election is not the worrying bit of the electoral process.

Yes, which is why I think there's a threshold and until that's reached Trump is pretty safe. If he starts impacting on primaries then it will change suddenly.

As he seems to be declining rapidly, he probably will crash and burn

Posted: **Sun Jan 12, 2020 9:35 pm**

The primaries aren't that far away. Get evidence of more bad behavior and take the time in the house to add charges, and it'll be too late to file primary challenges.

Posted: **Mon Jan 13, 2020 12:32 am**

lpm wrote: ↑
Sun Jan 12, 2020 3:22 pm
But it's election year, with the Republicans highly likely to lose the Presidency and the House, and the Senate touch and go - because they are led by a hated incompetent who commits crimes and has dementia.

I wouldn't be so sure of those predictions. The Republicans have had plenty of time to gerrymander the voting areas, and in a surprising number of the central states which have suffered from depression and under-investment over the past ~40 years Trump is seen as the breath of fresh air from the usual Washington politicians who ignore middle-America.

The fact that Trump hasn't really done anything for middle-America, doesn't matter - he acknowledges that they exist and so they'll vote for him, especially over some Washington politician who only visits the state once every 4 years.

Posted: **Mon Jan 13, 2020 1:11 am**

Martin_B wrote: ↑
Mon Jan 13, 2020 12:32 am
The Republicans have had plenty of time to gerrymander the voting areas

Gerrymandering has zero effect on the Senate and very nearly zero effect on the Presidency. It only really matters in the House, which is already held by the Democrats.

ETA: and in the state legislatures.

Posted: **Mon Jan 13, 2020 2:50 am**

Still, you can tell how well the White House is functioning through impeachment by its tweets this evening about the first snow of the year.

It was 17C today in Washington, and was 12C and clear when they tweeted.

Posted: **Mon Jan 13, 2020 8:30 am**

It was snowing where the tweet was written and the author was keeping warm with vodka.

Posted: **Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:31 pm**

House prosecution team named.

"The Senate is on trial as well as the president."

- Adam Schiff
- Jerry Nadler
- Zoe Lofgren
- Val Demings
- Hakeem Jeffries
- Sylvia Garcia
- Jason Crow

Posted: **Wed Jan 15, 2020 3:47 pm**

It's all gone a bit nuts with Parnas evidence, as well. I'd say chances of there being witnesses have risen substantially, if not significantly.

Posted: **Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:03 pm**

Looks like there's going to be enough for witnesses, need at least 4 from the following 6 possibles:

Romney
Collins
Murkowski
Alexander
Gardner
Rand Paul

Now gets into just how far towards a proper trial they aim for.

Posted: **Wed Jan 15, 2020 6:56 pm**

lpm wrote: ↑
Wed Jan 15, 2020 4:03 pm
Looks like there's going to be enough for witnesses, need at least 4 from the following 6 possibles:

Romney
Collins
Murkowski
Alexander
Gardner
Rand Paul

Now gets into just how far towards a proper trial they aim for.

Possibly just 3 of them required, as Roberts formally has the deciding vote, and has to decide if he wants to vote for or against presiding over a trial with no witnesses.

Posted: **Wed Jan 15, 2020 7:46 pm**

Didn't know that. Thanks.

Scrutable

Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment

Re: Trump Impeachment