30 GOP Senators would vote to convict if vote done in secret

Senator Coons is a Democrat, what makes him think he can speak for thirty Republicans. Furthermore if Trump has really committed an impeachable offense no one should feel compelled to vote in secret. Secret proceedings is something we as Americans are suppose to be opposed to yet our political leaders think it's a normal way of doing business. They need to be locked up and the OP needs his head examined for posting this crap. Originally Posted by Levianon17

You ignorant fuc. I don't make the rules.

I don't care if they vote in secret.. you do the exact same thing when you vote. Our political votes are not made public unless we so choose you dumb fucker

There can be no secret ballot on this therefore the point is moot and the OP is a jackass for mentioning the possibility of something that is impossible.

The rules of the trial haven’t been agreed upon silly. That step is still to come. The probability is unlikely but the possibility is valid. Originally Posted by Jaxson66

The rules of the trial are predetermined by Law, not agreed upon by a bunch of hypocritical politicians.

The Senate is looking for a speedy trial. So as not to get too mired in the "politics" of it. Less talking, more dismissing. We know the end of the movie already. But I still hope the Senate will come to it's senses. A secret vote would be good. For their own consciences only.

The rules of the trial are predetermined by Law, not agreed upon by a bunch of hypocritical politicians. Originally Posted by Levianon17

You’re referring to current precedents for a Senate trial but amendments can be voted on the current procedures and passed by majority vote prior to beginning the trial. They may vote to have no live witnesses or call everybody and their pet lizards to testify. That will be by majority vote.

You ignorant fuc. I don't make the rules.

I don't care if they vote in secret.. you do the exact same thing when you vote. Our political votes are not made public unless we so choose you dumb fucker Originally Posted by WTF

You're stupid to realize your post was stupid.

all of them running for re-election. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

not all of them are running for re-election, depends on what class senators are in.

You’re referring to current precedents for a Senate trial but amendments can be voted on the current procedures and passed by majority vote prior to beginning the trial. They may vote to have no live witnesses or call everybody and their pet lizards to testify. That will be by majority vote. Originally Posted by Jaxson66

Linsy Graham already stated he doesn't want to call on any witnesses. He doesn't want to extend this bullshit any further. Basically what he is saying is the Senate will hear the bullshit then say ok thanks then file 13 it and get on with Government the way it was intended. But no matter what they do it still has to be in accordance with law even though this whole impeachment scheme was born out of lawlessness, that's why Trump ultimately won't be removed from office.

The rules of the trial haven’t been agreed upon silly. That step is still to come. The probability is unlikely but the possibility is valid. Originally Posted by Jaxson66

LOL

And if you want to take improbable possibilities into account, then you have to take into account that there may be an uprising in the House on the actual impeachment vote and Pelosi may not get to her necessary number. Seems the Dems are waffling on this in the House far more than Republicans, who seem to be standing pretty united. Almost all polling of the critical independent vote shows they don't approve of the impeachment as presented so far. Pelosi's bi-partisan vote on impeachment may not be in the direction she wants.

Or there is also the improbable possibility that the Senate throws it out on an initial voice vote.

Both as probable as the Bullshit of the OP.

But you guys keep on hoping. I'm sticking with the most likely outcome is some level of deliberation in the Senate with an acquittal. That seems the most "probable" at this point.

...Or there is also the improbable possibility that the Senate throws it out on an initial voice vote....

I'm sticking with the most likely outcome is some level of deliberation in the Senate with an acquittal. That seems the most "probable" at this point. Originally Posted by eccielover

I think very limited discussion with an introductory motion made that the "articles" delivered by the house are "insufficient and do not rise to the level of high crimes or misdemeanors"?

It's this scenario why the Dims are still talking about the wording of the articles. Which, if changed, will have to be voted on again in the house.

The charges (articles) do have to be specific.
To make it real simple, they could just make the articles: "Cause he won the election".

If the Republicans had any balls and sense of humor, they would hold an impeachment trial and extend it out as long as possible. If a trial starts, all Senators become jurors and cannot be out on the road to campaign. They will be in DC 6 days a week. On top of that, during the trial, they are not allowed to speak. They don't get to do their speeches and pop off. A trial would make it very difficult for the Senators running for the DNC nomination. And, because they are jurors, they could not go out to do a presser about the trial, while the trial is going on. If they did, a mistrial could be called. It will be interesting to see how this impacts the likes of Warren and Sanders since the caucuses are getting ready to start.

Linsy Graham already stated he doesn't want to call on any witnesses. He doesn't want to extend this bullshit any further. Basically what he is saying is the Senate will hear the bullshit then say ok thanks then file 13 it and get on with Government the way it was intended. But no matter what they do it still has to be in accordance with law even though this whole impeachment scheme was born out of lawlessness, that's why Trump ultimately won't be removed from office. Originally Posted by Levianon17

Dude, lightfoot Lindsey is only one vote in the Senate trial, he won’t be setting the rules.

Are you referring to the upcoming hearings in the Senate Intelligence Committee that lightfoot chairs ? Those hearings are about Crossfire, Horowitz, Comey having diarrhea of the mouth in 2016, yada, yada, yada.

The Senate trial will be over before those hearings begin.

Dude, lightfoot Lindsey is only one vote in the Senate trial, he won’t be setting the rules. Originally Posted by Jaxson66

You just keep up your misguided belief that Senator Lindsey Graham doesn't have sway in setting the rules or potentially influencing the votes of others.

Those statements are certainly going to add to your disappointment when this coup of a "secret" vote never comes to fruition.

You ignorant fuc. I don't make the rules.

I don't care if they vote in secret.. you do the exact same thing when you vote. Our political votes are not made public unless we so choose you dumb fucker Originally Posted by WTF

you are the most obtuse of all posters

there is a big difference in having a secret ballot for the citizenry as opposed to a secret ballot by the elected representatives of the citizenry


the citizenry's vote should be secret, to insure no backlash by neighbors, bosses, philadelphia thugs, the government etc.

this allows every voter his conscience in selecting senators etc of their choosing

while having a public vote, in full view of the citizens, putting the elected representatives on the record allows the citizenry information on who to cast their votes for and also keeps secret enrichments at a minimum plus more, allowing what we want and need, a citizen backlash where appropriate

have you no shame, sir? never mind, you have to have a conscience to feel shame

The DPST types would love guberment operations is SECRET , BUT that's NOT how guberment works over history only very bad things happen to he citizenry when that's allowed .............................. ...........!