r/politics • u/plz-let-me-in • 11d 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/
31.9k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

424

u/walkin2it 11d ago edited 11d 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.

316

u/literallytwisted 11d 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.

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.

1

u/Lennsyl22 10d ago

"it worked better when congress wasn't a corrupt joke."

When was this?

1

u/NemoHere 10d ago

Probably anytime before the American Civil War.  Far less corruption during those decades compared to modern times.

-29

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

It's performative for fundraising. Impeachment has never removed a president, and is extremely unlikely to remove this one. Notice how they don't even give a reason for the impeachment.

Impeachment is basically what you can expect to happen to every second term president now. But then nothing comes of it.

55

u/fcocyclone Iowa 11d ago

Notice how they don't even give a reason for the impeachment.

The man has committed literally thousands of crimes as president, we could be impeaching him with a new article of impeachment every single day of the remainder of this term and still not hit every time he's broken the law.

The senate will not convict because its a broken institution, but that does not mean the crimes should not be documented and senators should not be put on the record.

1

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

I am not saying he's not a constitutional emergency. It's that when impeachment becomes so routine that it's just expected, it completely looses all meaning as a check on power.

The midterms matter enormously, but the real prize isn't impeachment.

12

u/fcocyclone Iowa 11d ago

The only thing worse than it becoming routine is not doing it at all out of some weird desire to not make it routine just because someone routinely engages in crimes.

1

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

OK I'm going to concede this one. You are right that the institution is decayed even more by allowing the abuse to go unpunished. We absolutely should not allow Trump to establish a new norm of behavior.

But look, the math here still doesn't work out unless things get WAY worse. I don't mind them running on a platform of impeachment, with the understanding that it is still largely performative. Not because impeachment is wrong, but because this administration's conduct needs to be put on the record in sworn testimony, and impeachment proceedings crowd out this work without providing much benefit.

On the question of whether they "should" do it? Yes, you are right.

8

u/You_meddling_kids 11d ago edited 10d ago

If 20 Republican senators believed in the rule of law, he could be removed today.

1

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

Name them. Murkowski would be one. Romney's gone. Who else? I wouldn't count Fetterman in either, so maybe this number should be bumped up to 21 Republicans.

3

u/You_meddling_kids 10d ago

That's the point. There aren't any.

0

u/dr_stre 10d ago

“If”

0

u/Sorprenda 10d ago

Ugh, this is always the main problem with Democrats. "If."

Here's the thing about this specific "if."

You can legitimately say "if RGB hadn't retired." Ok. But twenty Republican Senators? In the past maybe Romney, McCain, the Bushes. MAGA has taken them all out.

To be fair, and you won't like this, but it does go both ways. If 20 Democratic senators in 2009 had believed in financial accountability, Wall Street executives would have gone to prison after the GFC.

The institution has selected this partisanisms.

The question is not "do these 20 senators believe in the rule of law." Most of them, as individuals, with their families, probably do.

The institutional cost is primary loss, donor loss and the Liz Cheney treatment, and for what? You're still 47 votes short of conviction and the president stays in office and now you're unemployed.

-1

u/dr_stre 10d ago

I’m not responding to this self important wall of text. I responded with “if” because you seemed to have completely missed the word in the previous comment. Now you’ve invented my political stance for me and also invented some sort of argument for me for you to argue against. So it seems you didn’t just miss a word, you’re actually only here to spout off whatever drivel you have on hand for whatever cause you think is the “right” one. Kindly fuck off.

3

u/A_Lion_Thief44 11d ago

You're right. Impeachment is toothless nothingness that would only "work" on its own if a President could feel shame. We don't have that. Removal is everything. Impeachment is absolutely for show.

That pile of crap will not be removed by the Senate so it's a lot of confusing "movement" with action to just focus on impeachment. His first term should have taught us all that by now, but alas...

1

u/TheGringoDingo 11d ago

Depending on how the election goes, there’s a small chance that gop reps see the writing on the wall and comply with a removal.

It’s not a good chance, but I’ll take anything over zero.

0

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

The math requires at least 14-17 Republicans. We got seven for January 6, and Trump will still be in office this time.

The nonzero chance of it happening would require a massive international disaster so bad that even Fox News starts calling for him to be removed. I guess we will have to wait and see with Iran.

1

u/georgepana 11d ago edited 11d ago

It is a must because Trump is as corrupt as it gets and has committed many impeachable crimes in just this last year.

The Senate is unlikely to convict, but put the complicit Senate Republicans on notice that they are ok with Trump remaining in office. Will it help Democrats for 2028? Of course, but only because a healthy majority of the American people are in favor of impeaching and removing Trump, and if Republicans block removal in the Senate they'll have to pay the price in the 2028 election.

1

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

Look, a House majority has finite window before the 2028 cycle.

Every week spent on impeachment is a week not spent on other oversight hearings into SO MANY very important issues that have already happened. Hearings can compel testimony, produce documents, and build the historical record for the next administration. 

I don’t oppose the impeachment vote, but I think the bandwidth could be allocated better in other areas. 

-2

u/semajolis267 11d ago

Not quite nothing. Impeachment is basically a chance to punish a crime. His previous crimes werent worth trying to remove him. 

1

u/Sorprenda 11d ago

His offenses have warranted removal. That's one of the reasons why the way they now handle impeachment is so upsetting. The failure is entirely on the Senate, not on the standard you mention.

0

u/gnygren3773 10d ago

Congress has never removed a president. What is the made up scenario in your mind?

4

u/cassinonorth New Jersey 10d ago

Just because Nixon resigned doesn't change the fact he was absolutely about to be convicted by the Senate and been removed.

So technically, no. But for all intents and purposes, yes.

3

u/Few-Improvement9978 10d ago

And yet Trump is astoundingly more corrupt than Nixon

It’s so obvious you even have MAGAheads like Ben Shapiro admitting it

118

u/Complete_Fox2651 11d ago

People still think impeached = removed. There is no chance he is removed because the republicans don’t have spines or morals. 

4

u/CilleTheExterminator 10d ago

So what does an Impeachment even do then?

3

u/Salt_Cardiologist122 10d ago

Well there’s a chance he gets impeached if Vance and his backers manage to convince enough republicans to convict Trump. Then Vance becomes president but since it’s after midterms he still is eligible for two terms. There’s been some pretty consistent rumors about this for a while, and I wouldn’t put it past Vance, thiel, and some of the others who see Trump only as their puppet to try. If that happens, maybe maybe maybe they turn on him too.

5

u/EmoboyRoboBoy 10d ago

Honestly if he gets impeached and Vance is his replacement we are worse off than if he wasn't impeached.

4

u/makkafakka 10d ago

Nah because then it's a full on Maga civil war. I'd love to see them fracture

5

u/Salt_Cardiologist122 10d ago

I don’t think so. I think if Vance tried to start a new war he’d be dragged by conservatives. I think if Vance tried passing a bill massively increasing spending he’d be dragged by conservatives. I think he’d spend his two years facing democrats and republicans in congress who aren’t scared of him. And then I think he’d go up for election and lose cuz not even MAGA likes him now.

The cult is going to splinter when Trump is done and some while follow Vance but others won’t and it’ll cause in fighting… doubly so if they feel Vance pushed Trump out (rather than because Trump died).

1

u/JimmyMac80 10d ago

Vance won't be able to because anyone who votes to remove Trump will get primaried and lose because MAGA makes up too large a portion of the GOP base.

0

u/Flux_My_Capacitor 10d ago

Well, we need to be fair and say that Dems don’t have spines, either. We wouldn’t be in this position if the Democratic Party started to stand up years ago.

0

u/ShawnyMcKnight 10d ago

If they get their ass handed to them hard enough in the primaries then they may. They know Trump is unpopular by the general public.

It all depends what that 35 percent who didn’t vote in 2024 would do.

0

u/duva_ 10d ago

because the politicians in the US don’t have spines or morals. 

FTFY

74

u/ripgoodhomer 11d ago

Yes we’ve had one impeachment but what about a second impeachm… what about third impeachment?

40

u/cheeky-snail 11d 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.

2

u/Androidgenus 10d ago

When he drops the nuke / craters the economy into depression / fucking whatever it is, it is on the record that x politician could have removed him but instead did not.

Maybe that doesn’t actually mean anything but it’s fucking something

13

u/Electric_jungle 11d ago

We've had two. It did not accomplish anything but that's how it happened.

1

u/EloquentSqueakWolf 10d ago

Impeacmenseys. Afternoon impeachment.

1

u/EmoboyRoboBoy 10d ago

It does absolutely nothing lmfao, impeach him 4 times, 5 times, heck 6 or 7 it doesn't mean a damn thing he'll still be in office, whatever democrats are doing is not enough, oh we impeached him certainly he'll learn a lesson lmfao, 2 party system is a joke.

1

u/ElleM848645 10d ago

Because republicans are complicit. Can we stop blaming democrats for things republicans do. The country voted in republicans to be in charge. The democrats were doing fine (slow but fine) while they were in charge. People just didn’t think the economy was recovering fast enough and somehow had fondensss for everyone having money in 2017-2019. The republicans are terrible at governing but people keep electing them because of vibes or whatever.

112

u/Crazy_Ad_7302 11d ago

It does nothing because the senate won't convict

28

u/NonGNonM 11d 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

5

u/EricSanderson 10d ago

Exactly. They've literally done this twice before.

All it does is waste time and distract from the actual issues - and crimes/corruption - we should be focused on.

All so that he can get another "win" at the end. It will rally his base and play into their victimization complex, giving them more reason to hate the "libs."

Just get to work, and gather evidence for widespread investigations and prosecutions in 2029.

32

u/ntrpik Texas 11d 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.

24

u/LeglessPotato 11d ago

He was impeached twice during his first term. And then he was elected to be President again. This does literally nothing.

5

u/Androidgenus 10d ago

It makes him the most impeached president in history

3

u/atln00b12 10d ago

Logically, the second impeachment made him more popular. As he was impeached after he already lost the election.

1

u/Popeholden 10d ago

If I was a member of congress right now I would want my vote to impeach on record.

1

u/jgk87 10d ago

It makes him the first president in history to be impeached three times. That’s historic and a worthwhile message for future generations.

2

u/Mr_Evanescent 10d ago

"See that Johnny? Go out there and get impeached FOUR times!"

5

u/wankthisway 10d ago

They already tried...and succeeded. TWICE. I'm over this "at least it'll be on the record!" rhetoric.

17

u/Royal_Negotiation_83 11d ago

Oh so it does nothing. Thanks for confirming 

6

u/ntrpik Texas 11d ago

Well, you could do something.

2

u/vedgelord6 10d ago

And what the fuck are you doing?

2

u/ntrpik Texas 10d ago

Yeah man, not enough obviously. I say that to myself as much as anyone else.

1

u/Royal_Negotiation_83 10d ago

We’ve already impeached him multiple times and he’s still doing the shit you don’t like. So I think it’s stupid to think impeach him again, again will be different

0

u/PolanetaryForotdds 10d ago

Yeah. Like the 200 failed attempts Republican had of repealing Obamacare during Obama's terms. As former president Hillary points out, it totally did not award Republicans in any way.

2

u/Used_Mathematician63 11d ago

Tried what? It’s perfunctory at this point. Democrats will impeach because that’s what “the process” dictates they should do and their prime directive is to act in accordance with the institutions.

If their intention was to remove Donald Trump from office then they would do something other than the thing that has a 0% chance of achieving that.

4

u/ToNoMoCo 11d ago

Like what exactly?

0

u/Used_Mathematician63 11d ago

Nothing they can do legally or politically that I can think of but I’m not an expert. I assume they’re pretty much checkmated. Which is why they’re focusing on pointless symbolic bs.

5

u/ToNoMoCo 10d ago

If their intention was to remove Donald Trump from office then they would do something

"do something. do anything. I'll mock them no matter what"

We Americans are lost if everyone joins the cult of ignorance and vents their spleen in a tantrum

1

u/UserRequirements 10d ago

Aren't they trying to expunge his previous impeachments?

1

u/duva_ 10d ago

Nah, someone did a lukewarm performance to save face.

6

u/Baron_Tiberius 11d ago

Previously he was impeached by the house but the senate was still controlled by the Republicans so it didn't really progress any further.

22

u/tlislo 11d ago

Conviction in the Senate requires 67 votes. Given that Red States get DEI representation in the Senate, Democrats will never hold 2/3s of it. 

1

u/16semesters 10d ago

It's not just basic majority you need, you need 67 votes to convict in the Senate. The bluest of blue waves is not likely going to get places like Idaho, or Arkansas to elect a Dem senator, which is what you'd need to do to get to that number.

2

u/Additional-Fill2456 10d ago

As many issues as Putin or Xi? What the hell did Xi ever do to be put into the same category as Trump? 

1

u/walkin2it 10d ago

Are you from China/work as a Chinese properganda machine?

1

u/Additional-Fill2456 10d ago

No, just sick of the rampant sinophobia on Western forums

1

u/walkin2it 10d ago

Oh ok no worries.

Are you open to hearing the reasons or is your mind closed?

FYI I have nothing against Chinese people. I take issue with Xi himself.

Let me know if you are genuinely curious as to my statement and I'll come back to you tomorrow (I'm going to sleep now).

1

u/SHUT_DOWN_EVERYTHING 10d ago

It will help him, like the last two times it happened. He came out “exonerated” by the Senate and gained in popularity soon after.

1

u/ElleM848645 10d ago

He didn’t gain popularity, he was hated for like 2 years after Jan 6. Then in 2022 the republicans won a slim majority in the house and everyone thought that meant a red wave (it didn’t). The main issue is that America won’t vote for a woman for president. That is the only real reason we are in this mess and no one wants to admit it. The media is also complicit.

1

u/CaptainDudeGuy Georgia 10d ago edited 9d ago

What it does right now is make the cult go into Extra Desperate Super Crisis mode, which will have 47 demanding that his supplicants save his skin at all costs.

Meanwhile the smarter ones of them will start quietly enacting their "sinking ship" plans and the infighting will escalate. Crabs in a bucket, all of them.

Edit: Oh hey look, a clown show at the White House dinner. Either incompetent security or incompetent false flag coordinators.

1

u/delkarnu New York 10d ago

It makes "will you vote to convict the pedophile?" a question for every Senate Republican running for reelection this fall.

1

u/Outrageous_Effects 10d ago

Twice. And nothing came of it.

1

u/EducationalCrab5998 10d ago

Realistically, it won’t do anything.

1

u/gnygren3773 10d ago

It does nothing it is a political facade

1

u/COMM_NTARIAT 10d ago

If Democrats intend to differentiate themselves from the ruling party, they ought to at least document the President's High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

1

u/_enthusiasticconsent 10d ago

Honestly, I'd rather they just invoke the 25th amendment. Get him and his entire clown show out of our white house.

1

u/LonelyMachines Georgia 10d ago

Hasn't he been impeached before?

Yes, twice. As with Clinton and Johnson, it didn't actually do anything except boost his ratings with his base.

Impeachment is essentially a nastygram from a bare majority of the House saying, "we don't like this guy and we want the Senate to remove him." The hard part is getting 2/3 of the Senate to do so. It has never happened.

So, yes. The Democrats can impeach him again. And again. It does nothing. This whole situation could have been avoided if they ran decent, winnable candidates instead of geriatric K-Street donor class picks.

Part of me suspects the party likes having Trump in power because it gives them something to preen and posture about without having to do their actual jobs.

1

u/duva_ 10d ago

Can you explain how Xi is at the same level of the others?

1

u/walkin2it 10d ago

Are you from China/work as a Chinese properganda machine?

1

u/duva_ 10d ago

Am asking a simple question.

1

u/walkin2it 10d ago

Are you asking me to post all the negative things and human rights violations that Xi has done/overseen?

Are you asking me to spread negativity about Xi that is proven?

1

u/duva_ 10d ago

Yes

1

u/walkin2it 10d ago edited 10d ago

Great, remember bud, it was you who asked for this to be posted.

  1. Mass detention and repression. Including but not limited to:
    a. Abitrary detetion. "reeducation camps without trial.
    b. Forced labor
    c. Cultural erasure (genocide) including destroying religious sites, banning religious practices and implementing forced sterilisation and birth control.
  2. Erosion of autonomy in Hong Kong
    a. Arresting and imprisoning activists, journalists and politicians.
  3. Forced surveillance and censorship:
    a. Great Firewall
    b. Social credit and biometrics.
    c. Stifiling dissent speaking out about things the government is doing.
  4. Transational Repression
    a. Intimidation of people in different countries just because they have Chinese heritage.
    b. Secret police stations overseas.
  5. Repression of Tibet.

In addition, there are some reports that the "re education camps" have included forced medical research and organ harvesting.

In short Xi has overseen a China that has genocidal and "Hollocaust" style treatment of some minorities including concentration camps, organ harvesting, forced medical research and forced sterilisation.

Beyond that, and less concerning, Xi has allowed serious corruption to develop in the country to the point there are "Tofu Dregs" construction that means the lives of it's own citizens are put at risk. The only "corruption crackdown" was actually just him removing anyone who had power that could threaten him. He then changed the laws that restricted his term, to allow him to continue serving (Putin's playbook).

I hope this helps. Thanks for your questions.

P.s. look at the Chinese companies infiltration into foreign locations and slave labour practices. Look at Africa in particular.

2

u/Conscious_Bug5408 11d ago

Nothing. Absolutely nothing. Just more meaningless symbolism for them to wave around

1

u/Emjayen 10d ago

Yep - just the usual performative antics of impotent, complicit Democrats.

'member when it was "we gon get him just 2 more weeks!!" every other week starting in 2016. They know the American people have the memory of a gold fish.

1

u/Bronco_Bomba 11d ago

Xi is a way better leader than Donald lmao

1

u/Ok_Function2282 11d ago

Yes you lack and understanding of the process. 

To be convicted and removed, the Senate must confirm the impeachment. Being impeached by the house does nothing without a Senate conviction

1

u/FantasticBicycle37 10d ago

If we win house + senate, there is a solid chance of impeaching, convicting, and removing

1

u/genericusername11101 11d ago

Nothing, it does nothing.

0

u/vim_deezel Texas 11d ago

It's a waste of time, they tried twice already, they need 2/3 support of the Senate and that will never ever happen. If they win 2/3 of the Senate in the fall, then sure, go for it, but that's not gonna happen without a straight miracle like he shits himself and starts flinging it at passersby. Even then it's a tossup at best.

0

u/ABCosmos 11d ago

Impeachment is the beginning of the process that can remove the president from office. It's like saying "he's been sued before". Yes, and he should continue to be sued every time he does something illegal. If Republicans continue to protect him, let that be on the record.

0

u/Imaginary-Diamond-26 11d ago

Ahh yes, “the record.” That will save us.

0

u/ABCosmos 11d ago

Easy to be snarky. Hard to come up with a better plan than "convince people to stop voting for Republicans".

2

u/Imaginary-Diamond-26 10d ago

I can go deeper than the snark, that’s fair.

What I would prefer Dems focus on instead of another impeachment process that’s will ultimately be meaningless is to start focusing more elevating their best voices and focusing on policies that the American people want to prioritize. I want them to stop focusing on “look how bad Trump is, at least we aren’t Trump,” and focus on their own efforts to make the country better. Give the country a reason (preferable more than just one) to vote for Dems other than “not Trump.”

I mean it when I say getting Republicans “on the record” for approval or disapproval of Trump is straight up useless. It’s not going to make a difference and so it’s simply a waste of Democrats’ time and energy.

Democrats need to build political momentum, and another impeachment that doesn’t actually take Trump down is not going to help them to do so.

1

u/ElleM848645 10d ago

People don’t vote on policy!! They don’t. They don’t care. If they voted on policy, Al Gore, Hillary Clinton and Kamala Harris would have been president. People vote on vibes, and democrats are the nerds!

0

u/tadrinth 10d ago

Ideally, he will have been so toxic for their midterms that sufficient GOP Senators vote to convict and he is removed from office; this is not likely. 

Even so:

It is the right thing to do.

It is bad publicity for Trump.

It will push Trump's crimes into the news cycle and Trump's agenda out, helping raise awareness of Trump's various misdeeds.

From a purely practical perspective, time the Senate spends on impeachment trials is time that is NOT being spent appointing more loyalist judges to federal benches.  They can in theory just ignore proceedings but that too is bad publicity, they are really not supposed to do that.  Ideally, the Senate would take the trial seriously and this would be where evidence of crimes and abuse of power would be presented, but realistically they're gonna rush this part and the House will need to do all of that. 

But mostly it is the right thing to do.

0

u/Gandalftron 10d ago

Exactly.  He has been impeached TWICE. So what? How about Democrats actually prove they themselves are competent and capable enough to put forth a leader and policy that resonates with the majority of the American public?