Of course not.
Of course not.
L L wrote:
Answer this:
Can Trump be convicted if 34 senators vote to acquit, regardless of how many senators are present?
Your question only makes sense in the singular case of 100 "official" votes being cast. Otherwise your question is like asking if 3:59.594 is a sub more mile, are all faster times than that also sub 4 miles? If 30 senators vote to Nay then Trump would not be convicted if ONLY 89 YES/NO votes were cast.
This will not be a typical vote. Senate members may not want to vote at all. They have to request an official excuse, and that has to be granted by Senate approval. There have been many Senate votes with less than 80 members voting and with votes being offical. There will be some excuses because McConnell and Shumer both have the same interest in preventing Trump for ever running for office again. The Trumper senators will all show up. It is the republican moderates and never fans of Trump who will want an out to protect their politic futures.
kibitzer wrote:
L L wrote:
Answer this:
Can Trump be convicted if 34 senators vote to acquit, regardless of how many senators are present?
Nope, not under any current scenario. If 34 vote to acquit, he *cannot* be convicted.
At least now. When DC becomes a state, if 34 voted to acquit and all of the other 68 voted to convict, he'd be SOL.
That is indeed a case were 34 loses (34 out of 102 if all 102 are official votes).
My question makes sense if anywhere from 34 to 100 senators vote.
If 95 senators are present and 34 vote to acquit can a president be convicted?
I asked a simple yes/no question and got a two paragraph response.
In every single scenario you can come up with, if there are 50 states then 34 senators can block any conviction.
Pays to advertise, I s'pose...moron.
"The suspect, Wesley Allen Beeler, 31, was stopped in a Ford pickup truck with gun-related decals."
Jeezis what a bunch of sasholes:
Its a good day to be a criminal. Criminals helping criminals.
Trump might make 100 pardons!
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/17/politics/trump-pardons-expected/index.html
L L wrote:
In every single scenario you can come up with, if there are 50 states then 34 senators can block any conviction.
CORRECT! Just basic arithmetic, gang.
kibitzer wrote:
L L wrote:
In every single scenario you can come up with, if there are 50 states then 34 senators can block any conviction.
CORRECT! Just basic arithmetic, gang.
If he frees insurrectionists, it won't matter. He will be convicted.
Dan Kahneman wrote:
kibitzer wrote:
CORRECT! Just basic arithmetic, gang.
If he frees insurrectionists, it won't matter. He will be convicted.
34 is a meaningless number ... which fails to account for what will actually happen.
The actual requirement is at least 2/3rd of members who are present who cast a yes or no vote. The simple math comes out of that.
LL is all knickers-knotted up because his 67 required, and no less, to convict is not correct.
Dan Kahneman wrote:
If he frees insurrectionists, it won't matter. He will be convicted.
True, but the article you linked to indicates that that is unlikely.
kibitzer wrote:
L L wrote:
In every single scenario you can come up with, if there are 50 states then 34 senators can block any conviction.
CORRECT! Just basic arithmetic, gang.
Thank you.
And that’s why I say you need at least 67 senators who will break with Trump in order to convict him.
They don’t mathematically all have to vote to convict.
But they all have to not vote to acquit.
But in the end, 67 votes to convict ensures a conviction.
Dan Kahneman wrote:
Its a good day to be a criminal. Criminals helping criminals.
Trump might make 100 pardons!
Trump is trying to tie up convictions of his MA-GAs for doing his deed in the courts. He would pretty much admit it was insurrection, and his odds of beating the impeachment conviction in the Senate go down. Lindsey Graham will bail on him.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/01/17/lindsey-graham-donald-trump-dont-pardon-capitol-insurrectionists/4198521001/L L wrote:
But in the end, 67 votes to convict ensures a conviction.
Try the actual math. 34 and 67 are meaningless except in the single case of 100 official votes you keep peddling.
kibitzer wrote:
Dan Kahneman wrote:
If he frees insurrectionists, it won't matter. He will be convicted.
True, but the article you linked to indicates that that is unlikely.
Trump has likely been warned by a lot of his loyalist fans that he will lose senate supporters in the impeachment vote. He might lose several votes if he pardons himself and family members.
Perhaps Flagpole is in this group defending the Ohio capitol.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/militants%20boogaloo.png?itok=wKY6jPhi
^likely little squatty guy in black sweatshirt
new coll wrote:
L L wrote:
But in the end, 67 votes to convict ensures a conviction.
Try the actual math. 34 and 67 are meaningless except in the single case of 100 official votes you keep peddling.
Plot twist - everyone except Ted Cruz gets COVID-19 and misses the trial. Trump escapes conviction on a 1-0 vote
Dr. Racket wrote:
new coll wrote:
Try the actual math. 34 and 67 are meaningless except in the single case of 100 official votes you keep peddling.
Plot twist - everyone except Ted Cruz gets COVID-19 and misses the trial. Trump escapes conviction on a 1-0 vote
Quorum applies. 1-0 is not possible. The Senate (and House) quorum requirement is more than 50% of the total membership. So, 51 members must be present to conduct official Senate business.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Perhaps Flagpole is in this group defending the Ohio capitol.
https://cms.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/militants%20boogaloo.png?itok=wKY6jPhi
Um...do you see any HUGE biceps there? Didn't think so...means I'm not there.
Also, one thing I will never do is be a protester that chants, "Hey hey, Hi Ho, [enter name here] has got to go"!
I'm not really into that type of protesting. Not how I roll.
new coll wrote:
L L wrote:
But in the end, 67 votes to convict ensures a conviction.
Try the actual math. 34 and 67 are meaningless except in the single case of 100 official votes you keep peddling.
Yeah this issue has been put to bed by the poster above. First a quorum is required, so 51 senators voting. There are 3 vote count scenarios for 2/3 voting and based on Senate precedents and provision for impeachment conviction only the second applies in this case:
1. Unqualified vote - 2/3 of the votes cast. Abstentions and absences are excluded from the vote count.
2. Vote “of those present” - abstentions are counted against the proposal but not absences which are excluded. The Senate provision for conviction clearly states 2/3 of Senators present.
3. Vote “of those members duly elected and sworn” - abstentions and absences are counted against the proposal.
To clarify further, it’s a sliding scale vote and in the case of impeachment the denominator can be between 51 (the quorum) and 100 votes. ABSENCES DO NOT COUNT, no ifs ands or maybes.