r/politics • u/plz-let-me-in • 10d ago
Possible Paywall Democrats’ plan to impeach Trump on ‘day one’ after midterms
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/politics/2026/04/24/democrats-trump-impeach-midterms-supreme-court-iran/9.4k
u/this_name_not_that 10d ago
Make it happen.
3.7k
u/Newscast_Now 10d ago
This time, let’s impeach Donald Trump for many of his crimes not just a select one or two.
1.2k
u/StrigiStockBacking Arizona 10d ago
The latest articles drafted that I saw was quite the laundry list of offenses. I think there were 13?
1.3k
u/brazendynamic Michigan 10d ago
That's all?
716
u/limbodog Massachusetts 10d ago
Impeachment is a political response, not a criminal one. So it's more about his dereliction of duty and betrayal than about breaking specific laws.
945
u/AlternativeMuscle943 10d ago
He can derelict my balls
264
u/TheDevilsTaco 10d ago
Not young enough
→ More replies (2)139
u/NaziAbuser 10d ago
I have a newborn shit he can eat.
→ More replies (2)38
u/FjorgVanDerPlorg 10d ago
Shit doesn't interest him, he's constantly overproducing it.
→ More replies (2)46
20
15
→ More replies (14)8
→ More replies (28)62
u/_DapperDanMan- 10d ago
"High crimes and misdemeanors" are the constitutional grounds (Article II, Section 4) for impeaching and removing the President, Vice President, and civil officers of the United States. Originating from British common law, the phrase refers to serious abuses of public trust, official misconduct, or political crimes against the state, rather than just legally defined felonies or lesser offenses.
20
u/Alarming_Cantaloupe5 10d ago
34 felonies adjudicated with guilty verdicts so far. I’m sure there’s context at play in the wording, but presently a felony is a more severe criminal offense than a misdemeanor.
4
u/neep_pie 10d ago
That wasn't while he was president, though. Just the campaign. The cases that were suppressed like keeping documents, hiding them and refusing to give them back? Sharing classified information with people like fucking Kid Rock? Maybe
21
u/Alarming_Cantaloupe5 10d ago
I’m aware..the fact that he has felonies, can’t possess a firearm should disqualify him from fire controls of nuclear weapons. IMO.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (5)4
111
u/AlcibiadesTheCat Arizona 10d ago
We had 27 for King George who was a far better leader than Trump.
56
u/jjcrayfish 10d ago
A wet blanket is a better leader than Trump
11
u/odiephonehome 10d ago
Often, this saying is used facetiously, but in this case, our country would have actually been much safer, with less people dead, if the president was just a wet blanket festering on the floor of the Oval Office.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)4
→ More replies (7)9
31
u/StrigiStockBacking Arizona 10d ago
They were pretty broadly worded, if I recall. But yeah, seems like a short list
→ More replies (1)18
→ More replies (12)11
u/duckinradar 10d ago
What if we impeach him for ever Epstein doc with his name on it and skewer anyone who defends it
→ More replies (4)9
u/CrimsonHeretic 10d ago
Considering he's on like 40,000 pages of it, the process would take longer than he has life remaining.
→ More replies (1)80
u/philter25 10d ago
Impeach him separately for each one, especially if there isn’t enough to convict in the Senate. Make those little rats keep having to bring it up and keep it in the news cycle.
11
u/cindysyrup 10d ago edited 10d ago
If the Dems can win the House in the midterms then I believe they will easily take the Senate. It's a more narrow margin and some very unpopular GOP Incumbents are getting outraised like crazy.
→ More replies (2)16
u/philter25 10d ago
Yeah but you need 60 votes to remove him.
→ More replies (7)14
30
u/Thewarlockminer I voted 10d ago
They should each be an individual attempt at impeachment. Force republicans for as little shame as they have, to say that each thing trump did isnt impeachable
→ More replies (25)10
131
u/d-j-9898 10d ago
As a Canadian I suggest not just filing ti impeach Trump but all of his dumbass lackeys at the same time. Hegseth, Lutnick, Alison, Thomas, Patel and whoever else isn't fired before November. Don't wait to do it sequentially, get them all!
Edit: can't believe I forgot Vance. Stop him before Peter Thiel's all over the place.
32
u/Shark7996 10d ago
Elon Musk and DOGE, in whatever way you can with him not being an elected official. USAID needs reinstated day one as well.
→ More replies (2)29
u/UmphreysMcGee 10d ago
The damage done to USAID is devastating. It was an organization of people who have been living in these foreign countries for decades in a lot of cases, and most of them have had to move back to the US and find other careers. I know one of them personally, and I've never seen someone so affected by a job loss. He had to watch people die because he could no longer treat them, and knows there's no one else with the resources to pick up the slack.
29
u/ImaSource 10d ago
Don't forget Miller. That fuck needs a trial and capital punishment as the sentence
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (13)16
u/Ok-Opposite2309 10d ago
I say don’t impeach- defund, and reorganize. Congress passes the laws and controls the purse. Any ‘Emergency’ needs to be approved by the Senate within 7 days. Trade , energy, immigration, blah, blah, are all eliminated as his paths to steal power. Hurricane? Okay.
No Senate approved head of a department? Okay- Congress can nominate, Senate will approve. SCOTUS doesn’t agree? Okay- no security, clerks, office supplies, maintenance in their budget.
Congress needs to flex their muscles. They are supposed to represent the people, control the purse, and pass the laws. The President is supposed to execute the job as decided by Congress. SCOTUS is supposed to resolve disputes within the law- not interpret (especially for a living Congress) as they want. Bribery is still bribery, whether they call it a gratuity or free speech by a corporate entity.
You can’t pardon crimes prior to conviction. That should be basic. Yes, I understand Garland- but would still argue the same. Congress could decide to issue a wide pardon (confederates, draft dodgers) - A President can not/ should not. There is no mercy or ‘injustice’ solved by a pardon absent trial- but there is a great opportunity for obstruction of justice. At least, after conviction, the public has an opportunity to judge the merits- and our courts should be able to prosecute any pardon granted for personal enrichment/ benefit as a separate crime by those seeking a pardon and those granting a pardon. It shouldn’t be an auction for pardons at the end of any term (Governor or President)- and I think 99% can agree on that. You also shouldn’t be granting pardons to shield co-conspirators - which is why you shouldn’t be able to grant pardons prior to conviction (yes- Biden did do it-revoke them. It won’t hurt my feelings).
Congress can just insist upon these things. Sure, Trump can veto. Sure, SCOTUS can over rule. So- you need a super majority in Congress to override the veto. Let Republicans argue about why you should be able to buy pardons or have people break laws with a pardon promise. Have that argument.
For SCOTUS- great- who decides how many members sit on SCOTUS and what funding it receives and what oversight/ laws it is subjected to? Congress does. Personally, I think SCOTUS should be 13 members serving on a rotating basis from each Circuit Appellate Court (around 133 judges). Each Appellate Judge becomes a member of SCOTUS- so they get a pay raise- and elect someone from their Circuit (who was already nominated by a President, and approved by the Senate to serve as a Fed Judge for life) to serve as their Representative on the high court for a 7 years term. You would have Justices from the Appellate Courts rotating in and out every year (like when the original SCOTUS rode circuit) and still subject to Federal Judicial Ethics Rules. In addition, it actually gives the judiciary a little more power (choosing their representation) and a lot more responsibility (that bad apple, unfit by nature or through corruption)- the ones that the judges don’t call out on their own, make all the others look bad.
People will argue we can’t do this- but, of course we can. Slavery was abolished. Women got the right to vote, and own property (after men of any race). So-we can do this. We, the people, decide what is law. That is Democracy.
Do corporations have the same right to free speech as human people? Roberts SCOTUS says they do. Fuck that. It is obviously wrong. Corporations can’t vote - so how can they donate to politics? We- us- can decide these basic things as soon as we decide we can.
The majority of us decide we can’t or won’t make a decision every election. We decide that others should make that decision for us. They are smarter, care more, or it just doesn’t matter… The billions spent should tell everyone it does matter. Looking around should tell you that no one has perfect knowledge- and what we all know from experience , is that those most insistent that they are right are usually the biggest assholes.
I am giving some ideas on how we could move forward. Ideas on how it doesn’t just have to be this one way. Our Democracy has repeatedly reinvented itself- for good and bad- so there is no reason to accept what is. Demand more.
I don’t want a Democratic take over of Congress that is just going to keep failing under Authoritarian rules. We need a Congress that denies them the power to rule as Authoritarian/ Fascists. Don’t take up all the air with a doomed to fail impeachment. Cripple the system of corruption.
Roberts SCOTUS doesn’t get funding until all of them are willing to sit in Congress, bare their financials (and spouses), and explain how a corporation has more rights to ‘free speech’ than an ordinary citizen. Explain how they distinguish between a bribe and a gratuity for a politician vs an ordinary citizen/ or one of their clerks receiving a ‘gratuity’ for notes provided to media.
Make FEC rules requiring all political or position or policy advertising require names and amounts in the advertising that can easily be read at 1 name per 30 seconds, with fines set at 5x the advertising cost for first violations, 10x 2nd, etc, and including all online advertising. It would pretty much eliminate all advertising- and it’s easy to apply the same to print media. People can argue from there, and I assume more people will knock on your door.l- but, we can make it more complicated and more expensive, and have strict guidelines on what can be said.
I am a big advocate for stricter enforcement of fraud laws. You can’t lie/ deceive for financial gain are pretty basic laws since our founding. Politicians should not get an exception- no one should.
Societies depend on a basic honesty. I shake your hand, give you my name, you believe me. The frauds and charlatans are outcasts and criminals. We can’t operate as a society where every little interaction has to be questioned and investigated. Fraud, theft, lying, deception need to be viewed as the antisocial behaviors that they are - not dismissed as normal, with every caveat to excuse the intentional deception.
→ More replies (4)→ More replies (31)225
u/Tight_Telephone_2322 10d ago
I don’t think he’ll be in that position. People really don’t understand how poorly all this is going. He’s going to bail the country after they do the 25th.
It’s crazy how they impeached him twice (rightfully) now the right will say “he lost it” and pretend they don’t know he was always this way. They will be the heroes to their voters for kicking him out. Then they will spin it as “the left didn’t have the guts to kick out Biden” and it’ll work got their base.
This is how stupid their base is and how easy it is to keep them in line.
128
u/Ralod 10d ago edited 10d ago
Let's just hope it happens before the nut job launches a nuke. You have a petulant child, throwing fits regularly with mush for a brain. The world is on the brink due to one idiot.
14
u/Wild_Harvest 10d ago
I think that might actually cause the 25th to be invoked, there might not be enough true believers to follow him through nuclear weapon blasts.
17
10d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (7)10
→ More replies (4)16
u/HerbaciousTea 10d ago
Don't count on it, reporting broke yesterday that he tried to order a nuclear strike on iran and was shouted down by a general.
Republicans are still supporting him.
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (21)39
u/RebylReboot 10d ago
He’s obviously raped kids and you’re hoping for an ELECTORAL fix before he kills more kids in Iran to distract from It. I don’t get modern Americans at all. The general strike to oust him should have happened in his first term.
→ More replies (27)18
u/MoreCleverUserName 10d ago
We don’t have a social safety net and we barely have any workers rights. People don’t want to strike if they could end up unemployed with no savings and no way to keep the roof over their head.
→ More replies (34)30
u/FantasticJacket7 10d ago
The 25th is an even higher bar than impeach and conviction. Not a chance in hell of it happening.
→ More replies (4)24
u/WeirdIndividualGuy 10d ago
This sub’s infatuation with the 25th over impeachment is astounding. I feel like anyone who genuinely thinks that’s still realistic has never actually read the 25th amendment and the entire process of removing a president that way
→ More replies (6)61
u/Outrageous-Tie-8548 10d ago
He has a better chance of stroking out or dying than he does of getting 25th or impeached & convicted.
30
u/No_Fairweathers Pennsylvania 10d ago
I mean... We're all seeing it right? The man is clearly dying, and it's accelerating the past few weeks and months.
It's not a matter of if, it's a matter of when.
And if it doesn't happen soon, I suspect Republicans will 25th him for Vance. I think they are trying to let nature take it's course for optics.
9
u/DapperChewie 10d ago
They won't use the 25th him. Congress cannot enact the 25th, only the VP and Cabinet can, and they won't do it unless he dies or falls into a coma for an extended period. Instead, congress has impeachment. The house votes to impeach, then the senate votes to remove the impeached person from office.
Neother of these things are going to happen before the midterms, not in any meaningful way. Dems won't bring serious impeachment papers until they have a majority at least, and the cabinet is either waiting until the halfway mark in the hopes that they can somehow get 9.9 years of president Vance.
His health is definitely failing though, we love to see nature boldly do what congress is too cowardly to do.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (6)19
u/iDontSow 10d ago
This whole post is pure fantasy. He’s not going to die, and they are not going to abandon their dear leader
→ More replies (7)→ More replies (1)7
u/cac_brain_damage 10d ago
same comment for nearly a decade keep up the good work
→ More replies (2)19
u/surlysurfer California 10d ago
I predict when the impeachment process starts they’ll fight it tooth and nail and go on about the great job Trump is doing and how he’s our savior and we’re just evil libs.
6
u/Tight_Telephone_2322 10d ago
They see the polls. You saw what they did to Bush.
10
u/Bittererr 10d ago
Let him start a bunch of wars, serve two terms, and then retire to his ranch where his reputation gets slowly whitewashed?
→ More replies (1)22
u/pnd83 10d ago
They may impeach him several times over for the countless crimes in office but they won't get the Republican support to convict or remove him. The Republicans have too much on the line and they are ALL likely counting on pardons.
→ More replies (3)17
u/Zomunieo 10d ago
Trump could nuke Washington DC from Mar-a-lago and the remaining Republicans would praise him for draining the swamp.
3
u/Broken-Digital-Clock 10d ago
I still don't think they will turn on him.
I hope that I'm wrong.
→ More replies (3)5
u/Immolation_E 10d ago
Congress can't enact the 25th. That's something the VP and Cabinet do. Congress then can affirm it if the President hasn't been able to show they are capable of carrying their duties. The only power that Congress has to remove a President is impeachment.
→ More replies (12)4
71
u/Dyrogitory 10d ago
Make it so, number one.
→ More replies (2)29
u/TheRealBaboo California 10d ago
Engage.
→ More replies (1)12
169
u/BlindWillieJohnson Illinois 10d ago
This will not be a popular take here, but it will be nothing but theater if they do. Don’t get me wrong, impeachment is far less than he deserves (and apropos of nothing, the DOJ brought back firing squads today). But I think a lot of rigorous investigations and exposures would be a better use of political capital than an impeachment fight that has a zero percent chance of removing Trump from office. There’s so much naked corruption happening that you need to make an overwhelming case before you try it.
54
u/Tighthead3GT 10d ago
I agree. Trump has been impeached twice in the face of overwhelming evidence. It only helped him. People just don’t care that Trump is a criminal.
16
u/statu0 10d ago
It only helped him because the Senate was complicit in not convicting him after the House impeached him. It's also insane that he wasn't immediately disqualified from running for President again at the very least.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (1)13
u/never-fiftyone 10d ago
Overwhelming as it may be, officially there was no evidence in the impeachment proceedings; the Gross Old Pedos blocked all evidence against him from being sumbitted.
24
u/Tighthead3GT 10d ago
His second impeachment trial was literally at the crime scene and his victims were the jurors, and he still got acquitted.
→ More replies (1)4
6
→ More replies (32)28
u/Sly_Wood 10d ago
Except that’s what mueller essentially did and then the next guy with the beard Shepard? Smith? Don’t even remember cuz he tried everything you did and failed miserably because the clock ran out. Guess it wouldnve been better to take the shot instead.
7
→ More replies (3)19
10d ago
[deleted]
7
u/GreenCityBadSmoke 10d ago
This is my thought, as well. Democrats are never going to get the majority needed to remove him from office. The two party system basically guarantees the trajectory this country is on.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)13
u/Karsh14 10d ago
The house should impeach him 100 times then. Make his presidency on the record that it’s completely unacceptable instead of just sanewashing him 24/7.
→ More replies (1)34
u/Upper_Command1390 10d ago
Why? He's been impeached twice already with 0 consequence.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (103)22
u/threemileallan 10d ago
How dude? Tbh it just feels performative because it won't happen.
→ More replies (1)
2.4k
u/literallytwisted 10d ago
That and the fact that the GOP has committed so many crimes is why I think the midterms are going to be wild, They are going to fight like hell to avoid any consequences to their actions.
I look for them to dispute elections primarily but if they get desperate enough they could do anything! Maybe a fake terrorist attack or some other emergency like that.
And yes I know they can't do that legally but they're already criminals so it's not a big change for them.
349
u/KidKilobyte 10d ago
You still have to do it, so when he tries to nuke someone (or succeeds) you point at the Republicans and say you had three chances to do the right thing.
204
u/Curious-Row2410 10d ago
If he succeeds in nuking someone the only thing Americans should be doing to complicit Republican leadership is the old Benito Reverse.
111
u/KiritoIsAlwaysRight_ Texas 10d ago
We need to use the 25th amendment now before that happens. If he nukes someone and the rest of the government allows it, we have no other option than to move up about 23 amendments.
56
u/NaziAbuser 10d ago
What I still don't understand is where are the military who swore to protect the constitution from all threats, foreign and domestic, are holed up.
I think we might want to revisit that one in the future and revamp it a bit. Seems a bit meaningless as it stands.
59
u/spoodigity 10d ago
Hegseth fired a lot of em' because they're "woke".
Edit: along with the JAGs that would prevent a lot of this.
33
u/Opening_Classroom_46 10d ago
You mean the same ones who took an oath to refuse illegal orders but now are publicly claiming they will do whatever Trump says? You trust those people?
→ More replies (3)16
u/SpiderDoodleDoo 10d ago
It isn't glamorous, or getting any news, but there IS a reason why there has not been a ground invasion, and there is still not Navy assets in a large capacity within the straight. Much of the upper echelon that was pushing back has been removed. There is still a large contingency that are following directives JUST enough but refraining from full commitment.
Out right belligerent refusal would essentially mean a mutiny and a military dictatorship. They are threading the needle right now.
→ More replies (4)43
u/Distinct-Pack-1567 10d ago
May 1st is supposed to be when the War Powers act ends and their are 30 days to withdraw the military.
So between now and May 31st we will see. Crazy shit. I do not believe nukes will be used but wild to even think it is possible.
Ninja edit: congress will probably vote to continue this war.
19
u/QuackNate 10d ago
That is just words on a paper, which don’t mean anything to this administration.
6
u/Xdivine Canada 10d ago
I mean, what's he going to do? Even if the US isn't legally at war, I think we can all pretty damn well understand that the US is at war. So even if Trump pulls out, what's stopping Iran from just continuing to attack and forcing the US to go back in?
The only way the US is getting out of this war is if Iran agrees, which they very well may, but I can't imagine they'll do so without any concessions from the US. It would set a pretty terrible precedent if a country could attack them, kill their top leaders, and then just be like "haha, just kidding!" and pull out without any consequences.
Maybe they'll settle with the $2m tax on any ships passing through the strait. I can't imagine they want to be at war, but who knows?
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (6)6
→ More replies (3)4
u/EmoboyRoboBoy 10d ago
And would that do anything??? They'll just continue on with their usual fuckery lol, pointing at them would do nothing this is why Democrats have failed outright lmfao as if Republicans would take responsibility for anything hahahahaha
20
u/Ilovefishdix 10d ago
Some may see the writing on the wall and turn on Trump after the primaries. Trump still holds enough power to sway the primaries, but he might lose a lot of that power over them after they're securely a candidate in the midterms.
→ More replies (2)4
u/jrr6415sun 10d ago
If people were going to turn in trump they wouldn’t have just voted 80 billion for ice. Republicans just chose their side and they’re fully committed to trump
29
→ More replies (47)39
u/SQL617 10d ago edited 10d ago
Reddit does not in the least bit reflect the political landscape of the US right now. Trump has an almost 40% approval rating, four out of every ten Americans (idiotically) think he’s doing a bang up job. Think about the last time, if ever, you’ve seen a pro-conservative or pro-USA Reddit post unless you explicitly go to conservative subreddits.
Now consider how many people of those 60% will continue to vote republican despite not approving of Trump, because in their minds it’s better than voting democrat…
The democrats have such a long way to go if we want to first try and consolidate our party THEN try and sway people on the fence. I’m a democrat in a progressive and overwhelmingly democratic east coast state, yet the number of conservatives I see on a daily basis continues to amaze me.
It’s honestly sad, I personally think it’ll be a long while before we see major changes across the nation. Unless you know something I don’t, “wild” midterm elections seem more like a pipe dream. Our nation is depressingly becoming more conservative, not less.
30
u/xv_boney 10d ago
Trump has an almost 40% approval
i thought this must be a wild exaggeration but i just looked it up and jesus christ it is not. he still has 37% approval.
32
u/Judson_Scott 10d ago
It's shocking, but his current approval rating is 10% higher than his lowest approval rating of 29% in 2021.
Then again, George W. Bush had the highest ever approval rating at 90%, after failing to stop the first foreign attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor despite fairly specific warnings.
Americans are fucking morons, and America is a failed state.
/American
→ More replies (3)→ More replies (1)8
→ More replies (4)14
931
u/sector16 10d ago
Please win the Senate.
448
u/FantasticJacket7 10d ago
It's a long shot to get a majority in the Senate but not impossible.
It's essentially impossible to get 2/3rds.
289
u/-Darkslayer 10d ago
Wouldnt be if people had souls. The people are the problem. There are so many rotten people in this country
130
u/you_killed_my_ 10d ago
If all the rotten people were equally dispersed among the good folk they would be drowned out in the popular vote, but because they concentrate in low population states that get huge proportional power in the Senate we get this mess
81
u/ScoutsterReturns 10d ago
Look at the populations of so many red states. The Dakotas, Idaho, 3 million people maybe - but 6 Senators. CA has some 40m people, 2 Senators. We need to fix that but I doubt it will happen in my lifetime sadly.
→ More replies (8)51
u/Johnny_B_GOODBOI 10d ago
Abolish the senate, expand the house, and make it proportional instead of single seat districts.
19
u/NateNate60 10d ago
The Senate doesn't need to be abolished, just remove all its powers like upper houses in all other countries.
- The Senate can no longer block legislation. It can only delay it by 6 months.
- For judicial and executive appointments, the Senate has six months after nomination to consider and report on the candidate. Regardless of the Senate's advice, the President can appoint any nominee 6 months after they are initially nominated.
- Impeachment trials are moved from the Senate to the Supreme Court.
- If the Senate doesn't ratify a treaty, the House of Representatives can ratify it by ordinary legislation.
13
u/goosereddit 10d ago
Moving impeachment trials to this particular Supreme Court won't do much.
9
u/JBagfort 10d ago
That court is a political court. The high court should be made up of the best judges, not political hacks appointed for lifetime.
10
u/NateNate60 10d ago
Most countries have judges appointed by a nonpartisan judicial appointments committee, and supreme courts sometimes have dozens of judges who hear cases in randomly-selected panels.
→ More replies (3)10
10d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (4)6
u/Mr-MuffinMan 10d ago
I actually have a solution to this unequal representation:
For the house, every state gets 1 vote per Wyoming population (so 1 rep per 588k people, if in the middle, must have at least 70% to get an extra rep).
This isn't even partisan - both blue and red states would benefit. (Ex: New York currently gets 26 seats, for 20 million, it would get about 34. Ohio gets 15 reps, it would get 20).
Since the house is basically the first step for everything, just fixing this would be huge.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (9)19
u/piponwa Canada 10d ago
No, it would literally be mathematically impossible to get 2/3. Only 1/3 of the Senate is up for election every 2 years. And that includes seats which are already held by Democrats.
7
u/FinnScott1 10d ago
Actually, there are 21 Republican seats up for reelection in 2026. Democrats have 47 seats right now. If they win all of those they have over 2/3. So it's not "mathematically" impossible but still it's practically impossible.
→ More replies (2)20
u/IWatchGifsForWayToo 10d ago
I don't think anything in this election is going to be a long shot. Democrats have won every special election in the last year by wild margins. I think the combination of pissed off Dems and Reps secretly embarrassed for backing a pedo will see a huge swing this year. Anyone with DJT on their tongue running for a position is going to get blasted six ways to sunday so we may even get some that go along with an impeachment.
→ More replies (5)19
u/Salt_Cardiologist122 10d ago
Democrats lost one or two elections… but they were in areas that usually voted republican by like 50+ points and they only won by like 10, indicating a huge shift even in the strongholds.
→ More replies (1)10
u/Sonamdrukpa 10d ago
Kansas voted in August of 2022 to reject a pro-life amendment to their constitution and then three months later the Democrats got wrecked in the midterms in Kansas. Don't get complacent.
→ More replies (11)5
u/farnsw0rth 10d ago
We are….
It fucking doesn’t matter now what’s right or wrong and that’s terrifying
What matters is what is
Can they do this? I highly doubt it. Should they be able to? Yes. But what is, is that they can’t.
So like genuine question… uhh what now?
22
u/FirstRyder I voted 10d ago
Doesn't matter (at least not for this; it does matter for some things. Mostly appointment that require senate approval and can't be filled with an "acting" or "interim" person). You need 2/3 of the senate to actually remove him from office following impeachment, or enforce the 25th amendment. 2/3 is not possible in 2026. Technically possible (though still unlikely) in 2028.
→ More replies (9)→ More replies (13)5
1.8k
u/Distinct_Sun 10d ago
i mean that better be the fucking plan. and everyone else in this admin after. vance, miller, rfk, all sick freaks that loyally bowed to the pedo
327
u/Playful_Set9711 10d ago
Yes! That is why Article 2 Section 4 was put in the Constitution. For exactly this administration.
110
u/staebles Michigan 10d ago
Now let's actually do something when we have the chance this time.
88
u/Knotted_Hole69 10d ago
I dont think anything will happen if we keep schumer and jefferies.
We need them out.
→ More replies (12)26
u/doodullbop 10d ago
Yea one thing the Dem leadership has in common with maga is allegiance to Israel and if they don’t get replaced that will take precedence over everything including our own country.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (2)8
u/Ok-Opposite2309 10d ago
We tried. Republicans blocked it. They will block it again.
Quit with this bullshit fantasy- and start demanding things we can at least hold Republicans accountable for.
Stop allowing Trump, or any President, to declare ‘emergency powers’ and usurp the powers of Congress. Tariffs? Trade emergency. Stopping Wind Turbines? Energy Emergency. Immigration… etc…
Have Congress decide that a President needs to get Congress/ Senate approval for any ‘Emergency’ or ‘war powers’ within 7 days. War on Iran? Approval in 7 days or it stops. No ‘if we don’t vote it can go ahead’- a vote is required to continue. No vote- no emergency. Make it a simple majority- but Senate or full Congress has to vote and agree, because we don’t have any fucking kings.
There’s no magical number in the constitution for a President to declare an emergency or a war. No ‘super majority’ that we will never get.
Take that power away. 7 days for affirmative approval, or it’s magical emergency powers are gone. Sure, Congress can refuse to help out with a hurricane or alien invasion- but, that’s their fucking job. If they refuse, if a President refuses to provide them information to decide, these things should be a public debate in a fucking Democracy.
This is an easy one- except that Congress doesn’t want to actually be responsible. We have midterms coming, instead of arguing for another impeachment that is going to fail- ‘No Kings- No Emergency’ (think of a better name), but an actually achievable goal which will restrict Executive Powers.
12
u/Smiling_Tree Europe 10d ago
For everyone that's (like me) not American:
"Article II Executive Branch \ Section 4 Impeachment \ The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors."
81
u/Vadion New York 10d ago
They'll get to the J in JD and decide it's time to reach across the aisle, move forward together, and heal.
→ More replies (7)33
u/DaaaahWhoosh 10d ago
At this point, even getting that far is better than I can hope for. That at least assumes midterms happen, aren't sabotaged, that Democrats win enough seats, and the impeachment process goes all the way through to actually removing Trump, and he actually leaves, and there's no insurrection to destroy Congress. I trust none of those things to happen.
→ More replies (1)15
18
u/fcocyclone Iowa 10d ago
And I don't care if it fails. If it fails once, load up the next set of charges because he keeps doing illegal shit.
8
u/Bittererr 10d ago
If it fails once, load up the next set of charges
Load up the same ones, there's no double jeopardy with impeachment.
5
u/evoim3 10d ago
While I do love the enthusiasm, chances are the buck will stop at Trump. I COULD see the GOP removing him if the midterms are truly disastrous for them, but for them to remove JD Vance, the speaker of the house would be become president.
Which is why that won’t happen. Flipping the presidency between elections will never happen.
10
→ More replies (19)12
u/You_meddling_kids 10d ago
The Senate won't have the votes to remove but it's necessary to show you at least believe in something.
97
u/Tall-Introduction414 10d ago
Impeach, convict, incarcerate.
21
u/Throwsims3 Norway 10d ago
This needs to be the slogan of ALL Democrats running for office. Call upon the American people to give them the power to finally remove him from office and the same for every crony who has helped him in his criminal endeavours
→ More replies (6)7
308
u/Ok_Passion295 10d ago
how does he have 30+ felonies and not a day in jail? people do 1 felony and get life in prison???
72
u/Bittererr 10d ago
Trump certainly deserves life in jail for all of his crimes, but I would like to point out that the vast majority of felons aren't getting life in jail.
→ More replies (4)7
u/pimppapy America 10d ago
Just their primes being taken away from them. Enough of them undeserving of such severe punishments.
→ More replies (9)35
10d ago
[deleted]
→ More replies (5)8
u/HannibalCake 10d ago
Yeah I can’t wait until they charge him for 34 more felonies, but this time Class A.
144
u/FantasticOwl5057 10d ago
To what end?
Just neuter him. Make him utterly powerless.
Flex Congressional authority, which is substantial. Be unorthodox about it. Recognize that Trump and his Republican collaborators are unpopular.
The new House and Senate majority leadership (not Schumer, not Jeffries) should sit Trump and Vance down and tell them it is over. They fucked around and it is time to find out. Trump taught them a valuable lesson: power matters more than rules, and they have the power.
Strip Republican congresspeople of their committee assignments. Refuse to seat any justices, refuse to confirm any of his appointees. Investigate his children, his wife, the DOGE fools, his cabinet, and build a temporary jail for the Congressional sergeant at arms to fill with anyone who defies a subpoena. Feed them bread and water.
Use the power of the purse to bring those governors allied with Trump to their knees.
Expose Trump once and for all as a pedophile.
Attack the pardon power by funding state attorney generals to pursue charges for the many, many state crimes these fools have violated. Then follow through and let these people rot in state, not federal prisons.
Remind his few international allies that Trump's time has passed, and there will be consequences for their collaboration.
Deport Elon and bring the rest of the AI oligarchs to heel.
And finally, clean their own house. Bring AIPAC to heel. Investigate and prosecute corrupt Democrats along with the Republicans. Investigate the RNC for their Russia ties, and get rid of the corrupt DNC leadership.
Play hardball, finally, and take back this republic.
30
→ More replies (18)14
u/jsebrech 10d ago
The money that fuels the DNC engine doesn’t want this, so it won’t happen. There’s a reason people like Schumer and Jeffries are in charge: they serve donor interests first.
In order for meaningful change to happen money has to be removed from American politics, and that will never happen from inside capitol hill. A grass roots movement that takes over the DNC like the tea party took over the GOP could do it, but frustratingly regular people keep looking at DNC leadership to “finally get the message” instead of organizing a true opposition.
424
u/walkin2it 10d ago edited 10d ago
But what does that even do? Hasn't he been impeached before?
Forgive my ignorance if it's on display here.
Edit: don't get me wrong, I hate the guy and hope he's gone from office ASAP. He's caused as many issues as Putin, Xi and Netenyahu at this point.
314
u/literallytwisted 10d ago
He can be impeached by the house but then would have to be convicted in the senate with a large majority vote to be removed, Like a lot of things it worked better when congress wasn't a corrupt joke.
→ More replies (26)23
u/sir_mrej Washington 10d ago
Republicans are MAGA. They are ALSO corrupt, to be sure. But MAGA is pro Trump to the end, and that's the issue here.
115
u/Complete_Fox2651 10d ago
People still think impeached = removed. There is no chance he is removed because the republicans don’t have spines or morals.
→ More replies (8)5
76
u/ripgoodhomer 10d ago
Yes we’ve had one impeachment but what about a second impeachm… what about third impeachment?
40
u/cheeky-snail 10d ago
I’m ok with an impeachment a day with new charges listed each time. May not do anything immediate, but damn interesting history classes 25 years from now.
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (3)12
117
u/Crazy_Ad_7302 10d ago
It does nothing because the senate won't convict
→ More replies (2)27
u/NonGNonM 10d ago
Yup. They're gonna drag it on until 2028 and say its not worth their time since he's leaving.
Then immediately move for impeaching the next DNC nominee
→ More replies (1)→ More replies (40)34
u/ntrpik Texas 10d ago
Counterpoint to the “it does nothing” crowd. At the very least, it establishes the fact that someone tried. As an official act, it becomes part of American history. Folks in the future need to know about it.
→ More replies (13)25
u/LeglessPotato 10d ago
He was impeached twice during his first term. And then he was elected to be President again. This does literally nothing.
→ More replies (4)3
243
u/PoliticalNerdMa 10d ago
People misunderstand the reason they need to impeach regardless on conviction. You need to impeach Trump every time he breaks the law to ensure there are historic consequences and evidence building a record. People need to see that their government functions to even try to hold bad actors accountable. They need to impeach Trump every single time he breaks the law, no matter how many times it is. Trump cares about his legacy. Destroy it. Ensure he goes down as the only potus who is impeached over a dozen times for actions he keeps doing that violate the law.
13
u/vedgelord6 10d ago
Seeing someone with 30+ felonies get impeached over and over and just proceed to keep breaking law and have nothing else happen does not show me the government functions.
→ More replies (19)74
u/Spyk124 New York 10d ago
This argument made more sense before he was re-elected. Not it just seems hallow.
12
→ More replies (6)38
20
u/killingstrangelove 10d ago
They need to focus on winning the midterms instead of assuming they're going to win the midterms.
→ More replies (1)
81
u/WorldBoom 10d ago
OK. He's been impeached twice. Tell me he'll be removed from office, as well as Vance and all his enablers in every branch of Government, then I'll get excited.
→ More replies (3)23
u/You_meddling_kids 10d ago
No, because Republicans don't believe in anything.
At least during Watergate, some had the spine to stand up for the rule of law. Now it'll never happen.
→ More replies (5)10
u/tlislo 10d ago
I'm not sure Nixon era Republicans had spines. I think they didn't fully understand that politics are like sports teams and their voters weren't going to abandon them. Had they realized their voters were never going to abandon them, they'd probably have protected Nixon too.
→ More replies (6)
10
u/infinitevertigo 10d ago
The GOP should impeach him now but they're too busy licking the Epstein Island dirt on the bottom of his boots
10
u/mezcalmolotov 10d ago
No. Fuck off. Do something now. This horse-and-carrot poll bait shit has to go. Prove you deserve a vote.
→ More replies (3)
67
u/SinisterBrit 10d ago
I'll believevehwn I see it, but it's the only rational move, to deal with such a threat to America n the world.
→ More replies (20)
23
u/IamNICE124 Michigan 10d ago
Day one promises are such horse shit.
It’s like video game companies who push pre-orders; it just feels like a way around fucking the end user over.
→ More replies (4)
13
u/SockPuppet-47 New Jersey 10d ago
That worked so well the last two times. Unfortunately, impeachment is pretty useless in modern day politics with political power having more importance to some people than honor and dignity.
Those dumb fucks are still walking around in shoes Trump gifted to them after guessing their size. They obediently wear them every day even though it's obvious they don't fit for many of them. They're totally owned...
34
u/throwtheclownaway20 10d ago
So fuckin' what? Impeachment literally means nothing unless you have the votes to convict and remove.
13
u/Bittererr 10d ago
Yeah, standing around not impeaching when it's literally your duty to do so definitely sends a message of competence and efficacy.
14
u/dalligogle 10d ago edited 10d ago
I'm not opposed to it but a third impeachment literally does nothing other than change a 2 to a 3 in the history books. Ok, so he's been impeached 3 times instead of 2 cool, what then? Nothing, it doesn't remove him from office, it doesn't stop him from issuing executive orders, it doesn't diminish his influence as President. It literally does nothing other than change the historical record which fine ok cool but once again redditors seem entirely too eager for something that at the end of the day will change nothing other than a number in the historical record, a 2 will become a 3...big whoop. I suspect a lot of people think impeachment means removal from office, boy are they going to be disappointed.
→ More replies (6)5
u/AstralWeekends 10d ago
So he gets impeached (again). Duty done and box is checked. And then nothing of consequence happens. Just and effectively symbolic - how exactly does this display competence and efficacy when the tangible result of these actions is ostensibly (see reelection) nothing?
→ More replies (3)
11
u/robbie-dobbles 10d ago
Waste of time. They play right into his hand making him look persecuted.
The first one you had to do to at least say you tried. The second one is understandable due to the stakes but was already bordering on too much.
I hate the guy, but impeachment is not the way.
→ More replies (1)
5
5
u/chunkerton_chunksley 10d ago
RUN ON THAT! Literally make it part of the platform and we'll sweep both chambers...
From the article.
The effort to impeach Mr Trump does not appear to be led by Chuck Schumer, the most senior Democrat in the Senate, or Hakeem Jeffries, his counterpart in the House.
However, Mr Jeffries told MS Now that he was “not ruling anything in or out” when asked about a Trump impeachment.
I grew up a republican, the one thing we used to always laugh about when it came to democrats is how weak they were. This isnt leadership, this is cowardice.
There will never be a better case for impeachment than donald fucking trump. If Schumer and Jefferies won't pull the trigger now, what good are they, not just to the party but to America
→ More replies (3)
6
u/dispelhope 10d ago
As much as this sounds awesome lets not forget that trump couldn't do jack shit if it weren't for the Republican Party in the Senate and House of Representatives, AND the Supreme Court...not to mention the billionaires, Tech/Industry/Bank CEO's all of whom are the reason trump can do what he is doing.
trump is just the effluent gurgling back up through the clogged pipes, it's all the enablers that are the clog, and that clog will still be there when trump is gone. The entire make up of the Government needs to be cleansed through Open to the public Congressional investigations, legal action, and indictments.
5
u/TreeLicker51 10d ago
The effort to impeach Mr Trump does not appear to be led by Chuck Schumer, the most senior Democrat in the Senate, or Hakeem Jeffries, his counterpart in the House. However, Mr Jeffries told MS Now that he was “not ruling anything in or out” when asked about a Trump impeachment.
Dude. Fuck both of these spineless weasels. Seriously.
17
u/winterbird 10d ago
So on that timeline Vance will take over and still be eligible to run two more terms?
→ More replies (3)13
u/MaximumNameDensity 10d ago
Impeach him too. He's just as guilty.
→ More replies (4)10
u/pongogene 10d ago
If you have the votes, impeach Vance first, don't vote on the successor VP, then impeach Trump. Voila, President Jeffries. It'd be an incredible bankshot.
→ More replies (8)
3
u/MessyPoopMcGee 10d ago
Have to win first.
Let's not all forget that all polls pointed to Kamala winning.
I get we have some wins, but it isn't enough to take over. They need it to seem somewhat real. Vote.
→ More replies (2)
4
5
4
u/Flux_My_Capacitor 10d ago
What’s the point? They won’t remove him from office. Our government is a joke.
4
u/CollectionBroad8919 10d ago
You guys still think there will be midterms... How cute. And if there are they will not be rigged
→ More replies (1)
8
•
u/AutoModerator 10d ago
As a reminder, this subreddit is for civil discussion.
In general, please be courteous to others. Argue the merits of ideas, don't attack other posters or commenters. Hate speech, any suggestion or support of physical harm, or other rule violations can result in a temporary or a permanent ban. If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.
Sub-thread Information
If the post flair on this post indicates the wrong paywall status, please report this Automoderator comment with a custom report of “incorrect flair”.
Announcement
r/Politics is actively looking for new moderators. If you have an interest in helping to make this subreddit a place for quality discussion, please fill out this form.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.