It’s assumption from what I can tell, although it does seem to me plausible (coming from political/DC correspondents that have been around for a while).
Thanks for that, Sandi. Unless the writers of the Constitution were incredibly prescient they couldn't have foreseen that being present doesn't necessarily mean in the same room. Over here the benches in Parliament are largely empty, with most MPs attending via video links from home. The feed is displayed on screens around the chamber. Presumably 'present' in the Senate would follow the same principle? You never know with American politics. You lot are nothing if not traditionalists.
So that means 17 Republicans would have to vote for impeachment once they're split 50/50. By my rough estimation they're around 14 or so short, Which takes us back to learningtofly's point...
I've not read about this but I would bet the farm (though my brother might take issue with that since he's the one who owns the family farm now) that "present" will not need to mean physically present under our current pandemic circumstances.
I'm not so sure about that now, Octoberon. Lot of interesting news and info regarding major Republican donors pulling their financial support from Trump. Evidently McConnell has been involved in conversations with some of them. From today's local newspaper (an AP article): "Earlier Wednesday, a GOP strategist said McConnell has told people he thinks Trump perpetrated impeachable offenses. McConnell also saw House Democrats' drive to impeach Trump as an opportune moment to distance the GOP from the tumultuous, divisive outgoing president, according to the strategist, who spoke on condition of anonymity to describe private conversations. McConnell's views are first reported by The New York Times. McConnell spoke to major Republican donors last weekend to assess their thinking about Trump and was told that they believed Trump had clearly crossed a line, the strategist said. McConnell told them he was finished with Trump, according to the consultant." Major GOP and Trump contributors are dropping like flies in the past 24-48 hours. Money talks....
@Sandi T. - do you think there's also another issue here, in that it'll be easier (psychologically, ethically and simply through not fearing him as much) for Republican Senators to vote for conviction once Trump is no longer in power? If that's the case then McConnell's decision not to recall the Senate prior to 19th January looks it might have been (in part, at least) strategic.
Yes, @learningtofly. I think there are multiple variables at work here. Along with major donors jumping ship and McConnell's subtle and some not-so-subtle "messaging", there are other things that could well influence the outcome of the impeachment process in the Senate, too. Once others start to publicly step up and state their opposition to Trump and his actions, it becomes easier for others to join suit. Most don't want to go first. Regarding the Senate not being recalled prior to the 19th, thereby delaying the Senate's impeachment obligations until the Democrats have a majority, that will most likely also have an impact. One of those would (potentially) be to deflect some of the heat off McConnell because he will no longer be the Senate leader. At least Mitch probably hopes that will be the case. Additionally, as you said, Trump will no longer be in power. And the Senate will have a Democratic majority.
A couple of days ago I ran across a link to a large number of Donald Trump quotes from over the years, most all from books he has written. I thought this particular quote was rather "interesting" in light of his political leadership style and especially in light of his words and actions since the election.
I think that's highly likely. But in the U.S. political arena right now, who knows what the future will bring? Even the next day...or sometimes the next hour.
Maybe Donald had a ghost writer write that book of his and that particular comment was slipped in without him knowing it. He may actually have not read the book.
Here is another interesting question, should Biden pardon Trump (like Ford pardoned Nixon) in an attempt to heal national rifts? https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/534195-comey-biden-should-consider-pardoning-trump
The Republican Party should strip down and rebuild even just for the impression of concern. But they wont. They will do what the Tories would do in this country. Freeze, and wait till it all dies down, Then its business as usual. Bada bing.
Is this not what all political parties do following a difficult spell for them, so not just about one particular party... just saying
That would be an interesting development. I can’t see it happening. There’s too much bad blood and Trump crossed a serious democratic line for many.
@DCS222, I read a bit more detail and fact related to your post in todays newspaper (our local with an Associated Press story): "McConnell noted that the three previous Senate trials lasted '83 days, 37 days, and 21 days, respectively'." That last trial lasting 21 days was the Senate trial for Trump's first impeachment.
Good question, Octoberon, but I think it would be difficult to gather evidence around this particular action and its likelihood. I'm sure there are records of how many GOP senators voted with McConnell during his tenure as the majority Senate leader. But I have neither the energy nor the inclination to dig for it. Nor the stomach....
No. Of course, that's my opinion. I don't see a pardon healing national rifts. I do see a pardon emboldening extremists like those that rioted at the Capitol building as well as some of those politicians who are really starting to believe and behave as though they are above the law and that their actions will not have consequences.