• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
  • Hi Guest. We've rebooted and consolidated our Communities section, so be sure to check it out and subscribe to some threads. Thanks!

Opinion (USA politics) So if impeachment never leaves the inquiry stage, what's next?

Will it Pass the House of Representatives?

  • Yes, it will pass and go to the Senate

    Votes: 10 37.0%
  • No, it will not go to a vote or it will not pass the vote.

    Votes: 17 63.0%

  • Total voters
    27

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
I know this is the hot story right now, but if Democrats in the House do not pass articles of impeachment, where do we go from here? Democrats apologize? Democrats pivot to something else?

Would you agree or disagree with impeachment failing in the House?
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
5,266
3,560
1,010
I know this is the hot story right now, but if Democrats in the House do not pass articles of impeachment, where do we go from here? Democrats apologize? Democrats pivot to something else?

Would you agree or disagree with impeachment failing in the House?
This seems like an odd question coming from you.

But if serious, it's going to pass through the house, they have too many democrats. What you actually want to ask is what will happen if it doesn't make it past trial in the Senate. The media will of course implode since the trial will actually need evidence, and that has yet to happen in any of these hearings. Half the evidence or so called evidence, is hearsay, which can't be used in a trial setting by default, and you already have witnesses contradicting each other, so you would need evidence not yet seen or heard in these hearings to have a trial convict him. It would have to indisputably prove that he did bribery, which is near impossible to prove. They actually would have had a better, but still unlikely, case if they kept Quid Pro Quo.

Once that's over, the ratings of the media ratings will be the lowest ever, Pelosi will not win again, many house and senate dems will lose seats outside 3-4 that are smart and will vote against it, some deep blue areas might have riots, everyone else will move on and say "we told you so" and that's it.
 

Tesseract

Banned
Dec 7, 2008
42,676
21,015
1,490
The Pentagon
This seems like an odd question coming from you.

But if serious, it's going to pass through the house, they have too many democrats. What you actually want to ask is what will happen if it doesn't make it past trial in the Senate. The media will of course implode since the trial will actually need evidence, and that has yet to happen in any of these hearings. Half the evidence or so called evidence, is hearsay, which can't be used in a trial setting by default, and you already have witnesses contradicting each other, so you would need evidence not yet seen or heard in these hearings to have a trial convict him. It would have to indisputably prove that he did bribery, which is near impossible to prove. They actually would have had a better, but still unlikely, case if they kept Quid Pro Quo.

Once that's over, the ratings of the media ratings will be the lowest ever, Pelosi will not win again, many house and senate dems will lose seats outside 3-4 that are smart and will vote against it, some deep blue areas might have riots, everyone else will move on and say "we told you so" and that's it.
seems increasingly likely, this
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
This seems like an odd question coming from you.

But if serious, it's going to pass through the house, they have too many democrats. What you actually want to ask is what will happen if it doesn't make it past trial in the Senate. The media will of course implode since the trial will actually need evidence, and that has yet to happen in any of these hearings. Half the evidence or so called evidence, is hearsay, which can't be used in a trial setting by default, and you already have witnesses contradicting each other, so you would need evidence not yet seen or heard in these hearings to have a trial convict him. It would have to indisputably prove that he did bribery, which is near impossible to prove. They actually would have had a better, but still unlikely, case if they kept Quid Pro Quo.

Once that's over, the ratings of the media ratings will be the lowest ever, Pelosi will not win again, many house and senate dems will lose seats outside 3-4 that are smart and will vote against it, some deep blue areas might have riots, everyone else will move on and say "we told you so" and that's it.
No, I'm specifically asking what happens if it does not pass the House. I know the prevailing wisdom (so far) is "they have too many Democrats".

I agree that if it made it to the Senate then the narrative would collapse.
 
  • Thoughtful
Reactions: Tesseract

Sign

Member
Jun 4, 2012
313
273
565
There are basically four scenarios I can think of for this whole thing:

1) Democrats run through the remainder of the witnesses and disappear for a while coming back with a "strongly" worded letter about how Drumpf has not technically committed a crime but is none-the-less evil / threat to our democracy, etc. However, because of the "naked" partisanship (of Republicans not just rolling over) they will not be moving forward with impeachment as it will not pass the Senate. It dies at that point and in 3 months we get to do this again with something else. The same folks that fell for the last 2 things will, without the slightest hint of self-awareness, fall for this next one . . . and around and around we go.

2) They vote and it fails. This would be very embarrassing for the DNC / Pelosi / Schiff, but it would protect the lower ranking members as anyone that needed to vote for it does, and anyone that could not, doesn't.

------------------------------
Everything past this point is playing with fire and tempting Mitch McConnell.
------------------------------

3)They vote for it and it passes solely due to Democrats with quite a few defectors to the "No" side. Not a single Republican will vote for it . . . and it goes to the Senate where Mitch McConnell, feeling charitable, does a quick vote. The "No impeachment vote" will get bi-partisan support and it will fail.

4) May God have mercy on their soul.
 
Last edited:

autoduelist

Member
Aug 30, 2014
10,934
15,988
855
But if serious, it's going to pass through the house, they have too many democrats. What you actually want to ask is what will happen if it doesn't make it past trial in the Senate.
There are some pundits wondering if it won't, since, if I understand correctly, in the Senate Republicans will control the trial and be able to call witnesses.
 

s34ab

Banned
Oct 10, 2019
152
203
220
I know this is the hot story right now, but if Democrats in the House do not pass articles of impeachment, where do we go from here? Democrats apologize? Democrats pivot to something else?

Would you agree or disagree with impeachment failing in the House?
It would be this. They've been calling on impeachment since before he took office. They'll simply wite-out the 'reason' and replace it with whatever they think of that day.
 
Last edited:

Bolivar687

Member
Jun 13, 2014
5,088
2,926
565
USA
They have to know this will fail, I think the goal is to work up their base as hard as they can, so it will be like how, after the Mueller investigation wrapped, many said "but there's collusion in plain sight!" Except they want emotional snaps this time, so as many people can scream how Trump and the Republicans are destroying our democracy and the Constitution. Like the Kavanaugh protesters shrieking and pounding the doors of the Senate during the vote where he was finally confirmed, the Democrats believe they can disrupt our political process if only they can provoke their constituents into doing their hysterical dirty work for them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

zelo-ca

Member
Jan 26, 2018
1,034
1,213
400
The democrats will not impeach Trump. If they do it will be devastating because if it goes to the Senate Republicans will have control and will call in their own witnesses (probably Hunter Biden and maybe Joe too). Also the biggest issue is that Bernie, Warren, Harris and a few others HAVE to be at the hearings. They will be taken off the campaign trail for months.

The dems will shoot themselves in the foot if the house votes to impeach.
 

Eiknarf

Member
Mar 25, 2019
1,107
1,055
425
Doesn’t everybody know? If the impeachment never leaves the inquiry stage, you’ll see a mass shooting next. That’s all the Left has to distract
 
  • Like
Reactions: Singular7

desertdroog

Member
Aug 12, 2008
3,153
2,642
1,055
I would relish McConnell taking his sweet time to call the Democrats and any Presidential hopefuls off their campaign trail to interview and find out more information. If they can't adequately campaign, oh well....we have to find out all we can regarding the impeachment.

If the Dems want to play dirty, give them a shit sandwich of their own making.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
I would relish McConnell taking his sweet time to call the Democrats and any Presidential hopefuls off their campaign trail to interview and find out more information. If they can't adequately campaign, oh well....we have to find out all we can regarding the impeachment.

If the Dems want to play dirty, give them a shit sandwich of their own making.
No, I want this to end. I won't be cheering for political theatre, as hilarious as it would be.
 

infinitys_7th

Gold Member
Oct 1, 2006
5,760
6,754
1,560
I would relish McConnell taking his sweet time to call the Democrats and any Presidential hopefuls off their campaign trail to interview and find out more information. If they can't adequately campaign, oh well....we have to find out all we can regarding the impeachment.

If the Dems want to play dirty, give them a shit sandwich of their own making.
That's what I keep saying. He also needs to restrict their investigation to the specific charge of the Democrats (aid being withheld to force an investigation) rather than all the bullshit they shift to.
 

SpartanN92

Member
Sep 7, 2012
2,994
1,998
755
US
Oh I’m sure there will be some new crisis the dems manufacture involving a former soviet state.
Perhaps Trump sold arms to Armenia in exchange for a pair of Tulsi’s panties?
Then the dems will have their new 2020 rallying cry and we will be right back here in 6 months time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cryptoadam

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,632
3,555
520
Moore Park Beach
The democrats will not impeach Trump. If they do it will be devastating because if it goes to the Senate Republicans will have control and will call in their own witnesses (probably Hunter Biden and maybe Joe too). Also the biggest issue is that Bernie, Warren, Harris and a few others HAVE to be at the hearings. They will be taken off the campaign trail for months.

The dems will shoot themselves in the foot if the house votes to impeach.
I think even putting it to a vote could be potentially devastating.
If it would go to the senate early next year, next year is an election year and a prolonged impeachment circus in the republican controlled senate ...
I mean, no matter how long they spend in the senate to do the "very serious impeachment proceedings" the outcome is always 100% guaranteed to be "nowthing wrong happened, impeachment dismissed".
This will be the outcome in the senate no matter what, if they immediately dismisses it as being baseless and a LOLsuit or if they spend months and months on it.

In the latter case however, it is an election year and the main dem contenders for the primaries will have their campaigns essentially completely destroyed. Additionally, this time the republicans will set the rules for how the questioning will be performed and will also be able to call additional witnesses. Hunter is 100% guaranteed to be called, as is the WB and possibly Schiff as well.

I am certain also that several people from the Obama administration will be called as well. They will be interviewed on WHY DID OBAMA HAVE CONCERNS about hunter biden? Which we learnt he had from the house investigation.


Now, The democrats can vote and they can vote "no impeachment" but you can not rule out that the enormous advantage a prolonged senate investigation, under republican control, during an election year may tempt republicans in the house would vote "yes" maybe officially not for impeachment but they can word it as "we need to continue investigating thtis and get to the bottom of it." Just as a Fuck You Schiff. Now it is our turn.

That would be completely crazy if it happened, but we live in crazy times. Honk Honk.


If I were Schiff/Pelosi I would not risk putting this to a vote.
 
Last edited:

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,632
3,555
520
Moore Park Beach
No, I want this to end. I won't be cheering for political theatre, as hilarious as it would be.
In a sane world, yes, but we live in crazy times and the republicans in the senate is just as corrupt and opportunistic as everyone else in congress.
Sadly, I think they will not do what is right for the country or take the high road. They COULD see this as a way to do enormous damage to their political opponents during an election year and that is how it is.

See the positives though, more circus, more popcorn.

EDIT: COULD not WILL
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
I think even putting it to a vote could be potentially devastating.
If it would go to the senate early next year, next year is an election year and a prolonged impeachment circus in the republican controlled senate ...
I mean, no matter how long they spend in the senate to do the "very serious impeachment proceedings" the outcome is always 100% guaranteed to be "nowthing wrong happened, impeachment dismissed".
This will be the outcome in the senate no matter what, if they immediately dismisses it as being baseless and a LOLsuit or if they spend months and months on it.

In the latter case however, it is an election year and the main dem contenders for the primaries will have their campaigns essentially completely destroyed. Additionally, this time the republicans will set the rules for how the questioning will be performed and will also be able to call additional witnesses. Hunter is 100% guaranteed to be called, as is the WB and possibly Schiff as well.

I am certain also that several people from the Obama administration will be called as well. They will be interviewed on WHY DID OBAMA HAVE CONCERNS about hunter biden? Which we learnt he had from the house investigation.


Now, The democrats can vote and they can vote "no impeachment" but you can not rule out that the enormous advantage a prolonged senate investigation, under republican control, during an election year may tempt republicans in the house would vote "yes" maybe officially not for impeachment but they can word it as "we need to continue investigating thtis and get to the bottom of it." Just as a Fuck You Schiff. Now it is our turn.

That would be completely crazy if it happened, but we live in crazy times. Honk Honk.


If I were Schiff/Pelosi I would not risk putting this to a vote.
Personally I hope the Republicans stick to their principles instead of playing with fire. I doubt the Republicans are so sardonic that they'd go against their own constituents wishes with a promise of "trust us, it'll be funny". I mean, there would definitely be an interesting opportunity to investigate those things, but the Democrats are under other investigations anyway. Why cede an inch when you've already won?
 

sahlberg

Gold Member
Oct 27, 2017
2,632
3,555
520
Moore Park Beach
Personally I hope the Republicans stick to their principles instead of playing with fire. I doubt the Republicans are so sardonic that they'd go against their own constituents wishes with a promise of "trust us, it'll be funny". I mean, there would definitely be an interesting opportunity to investigate those things, but the Democrats are under other investigations anyway. Why cede an inch when you've already won?
It is a serious accusation which may need more investigation.
They could potantially just abstain from voting under the guise of "This is not time for being partisan. We should not obstruct justice by voting no. If trump is innocent the senate will decide on it."
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
It is a serious accusation which may need more investigation.
They could potantially just abstain from voting under the guise of "This is not time for being partisan. We should not obstruct justice by voting no. If trump is innocent the senate will decide on it."
That wouldn't match the opinions of the Republicans we've heard so far in these hearings, but I admit that would be a possible move. :pie_thinking:
 
May 17, 2018
554
333
320
This seems like an odd question coming from you.

But if serious, it's going to pass through the house, they have too many democrats. What you actually want to ask is what will happen if it doesn't make it past trial in the Senate. The media will of course implode since the trial will actually need evidence, and that has yet to happen in any of these hearings. Half the evidence or so called evidence, is hearsay, which can't be used in a trial setting by default, and you already have witnesses contradicting each other, so you would need evidence not yet seen or heard in these hearings to have a trial convict him. It would have to indisputably prove that he did bribery, which is near impossible to prove. They actually would have had a better, but still unlikely, case if they kept Quid Pro Quo.

Once that's over, the ratings of the media ratings will be the lowest ever, Pelosi will not win again, many house and senate dems will lose seats outside 3-4 that are smart and will vote against it, some deep blue areas might have riots, everyone else will move on and say "we told you so" and that's it.
If this wouldn't be a total partisan political issue and a real assement of proven wrongdoing, you need a lot of democrats voting against it.

Although proceedings were delayed due to the bombing of Iraq, on the passage of H. Res. 611, Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998 on
grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228–206 vote)[20]
and obstruction of justice (by a 221–212 vote).[21]

Two other articles of impeachment failed – a second count of
perjury in the Jones case (by a 205–229 vote)[22]
abuse of power (by a 148–285 vote).[23]




If DEMs vote unanimously on a bullshit charge that isn't as clear as perjury, you know it's not a real thing
You need GOP to vote for them and DEMs to vote against it. Just like in court room where you have people from different spectrums agree on a conviction or disagree on.
 
Last edited:

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
If this wouldn't be a total partisan political issue and a real assement of proven wrongdoing, you need a lot of democrats voting against it.







If DEMs vote unanimously on a bullshit charge that isn't as clear as perjury, you know it's not a real thing
You need GOP to vote for them and DEMs to vote against it. Just like in court room where you have people from different spectrums agree on a conviction or disagree on.
Bringing facts to the table. I like it.
 

Guynamedbilly

Member
Feb 28, 2018
636
671
400
I don't see that having any chance of happening, but if it did I imagine they would just pretend it never happened.
 

finowns

Member
May 10, 2009
3,502
1,143
920
I still think they won’t do a formal impeachment. I’d really be surprised if they did.
 

womfalcs3

Member
May 11, 2007
5,750
864
1,265
Another Trump buddy (i.e., Sondland) has spoken ill of Trump, and has assured Orange Man will be implicated and tried by the Senate.

Add him to the list of Tillerson, McMaster, and Kelly.
 
Last edited:

Afro Republican

GAF>INTERNET>GAF, BITCHES
Aug 24, 2016
5,266
3,560
1,010
No, I'm specifically asking what happens if it does not pass the House. I know the prevailing wisdom (so far) is "they have too many Democrats".

I agree that if it made it to the Senate then the narrative would collapse.
I still don't understand why your asking this. If the dems don't pass it in the house the same thing happens, just earlier. Not sure why you think there would be some major surprise.

Schiff calls it off, red wave 2020, riots in blue cities, media ratings reach new lows, all dems backing it lose reelection.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DunDunDunpachi

Cybrwzrd

Anime waifu panty shots are basically the same thing as paintings of the french baroque masters, if you think about it.
Sep 29, 2014
5,355
7,093
880
Public hangings for treason
I prefer tar and feathering. I support the death penalty, but I prefer... schadenfreude. Its immoral, and pointless to laugh at the "suffering" of the dead. But some naked, tar and feather covered treasonous asshole is perfectly memeable.

Also, I prefer bad people to suffer in life, death is null.
 
Last edited:

prag16

Member
Jul 12, 2012
10,893
2,151
755
There are basically four scenarios I can think of for this whole thing:

1) Democrats run through the remainder of the witnesses and disappear for a while coming back with a "strongly" worded letter about how Drumpf has not technically committed a crime but is none-the-less evil / threat to our democracy, etc. However, because of the "naked" partisanship (of Republicans not just rolling over) they will not be moving forward with impeachment as it will not pass the Senate. It dies at that point and in 3 months we get to do this again with something else. The same folks that fell for the last 2 things will, without the slightest hint of self-awareness, fall for this next one . . . and around and around we go.

2) They vote and it fails. This would be very embarrassing for the DNC / Pelosi / Schiff, but it would protect the lower ranking members as anyone that needed to vote for it does, and anyone that could not, doesn't.

------------------------------
Everything past this point is playing with fire and tempting Mitch McConnell.
------------------------------

3)They vote for it and it passes solely due to Democrats with quite a few defectors to the "No" side. Not a single Republican will vote for it . . . and it goes to the Senate where Mitch McConnell, feeling charitable, does a quick vote. The "No impeachment vote" will get bi-partisan support and it will fail.

4) May God have mercy on their soul.
Some combination of 1 and 4. Book it.
 

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
744
146
1,470
Either of the Bidens. Schiff himself.
What did the Bidens or Schiff have to do with what Trump did with regard to Ukraine? Are the Bidens going to explain why Trump needed to target them with Rudy Giuliani? Is Schiff going to explain why Trumps action led to the impeachment inquiry? In a court of law how often are the prosecutors put on the stand? How often are the victims made to answer for the defendants crimes? Come on guys you are better than this.
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
What did the Bidens or Schiff have to do with what Trump did with regard to Ukraine? Are the Bidens going to explain why Trump needed to target them with Rudy Giuliani? Is Schiff going to explain why Trumps action led to the impeachment inquiry? In a court of law how often are the prosecutors put on the stand? How often are the victims made to answer for the defendants crimes? Come on guys you are better than this.
woah, settle down. I was just answering your question. I'm not even sure the Democrats would be brave enough to push it to the senate, so I'm not sure they'd call any witnesses anyway.

From Wikipedia. "Bernard Bailey Kerik (born September 4, 1955) is an American former police officer, consultant, and convicted felon. " We are going with what a convicted felon says about Joe Biden now? Nice work. I guess you are saying it takes a criminal to know one. But he is looking out for Trump so...
Talk about shoot the messenger. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Katsura

desertdroog

Member
Aug 12, 2008
3,153
2,642
1,055
From Wikipedia. "Bernard Bailey Kerik (born September 4, 1955) is an American former police officer, consultant, and convicted felon. " We are going with what a convicted felon says about Joe Biden now? Nice work. I guess you are saying it takes a criminal to know one. But he is looking out for Trump so...
Ad Hominens are not an argument. I hope you read the link he sourced.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Katsura

DarkMage619

Member
Jun 19, 2004
744
146
1,470
woah, settle down. I was just answering your question. I'm not even sure the Democrats would be brave enough to push it to the senate, so I'm not sure they'd call any witnesses anyway.


Talk about shoot the messenger. :messenger_tears_of_joy:
You're right. Does that mean we can believe what Michael Cohen said about Trump and porn star payoffs?
 

DunDunDunpachi

Patient MembeR
Apr 18, 2018
17,336
34,221
1,290
USA
dunpachi.com
You're right. Does that mean we can believe what Michael Cohen said about Trump and porn star payoffs?
Separate person, separate case. I honestly haven't paid attention to the "porn star payoffs" controversy in the first place. I was too embroiled in whether he was a literal agent of Russia elected to subvert our nation from within.