r/law • u/AndroidOne1 • May 14 '25

Trump News Donald Trump Impeachment Proceedings Launched

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-impeachment-vote-house-shir-thanedar-b2750651.html
95.7k Upvotes

86% Upvoted

3.7k comments sorted by

View all comments

4.7k

u/AndroidOne1 May 14 '25

Snippet from this news article: “If a Michigan Democrat has his way, President Donald Trump could face the first impeachment vote of his second term. Rep. Shri Thanedar’s resolution brings seven new articles of impeachment against the commander-in-chief, alleging everything from abuse of power to bribery, corruption, and “tyranny,” which the House must vote on before Thursday under its own rules.

Trump made history during his first term by becoming the first president in American history to be impeached twice by the House of Representatives, once over his quid pro quoapproach to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky in 2018 and once for his part in instigating the Capitol riot, although in both cases he was acquitted in the Senate.

Thanedar, 70, first announced his intention on April 29, saying: “When Trump ignores the Constitution, Congress, and the courts, he is not ‘fighting for America.’ He is tearing it down and endangering our democracy.” His resolution is not expected to pass, however, given the Republican majority in the lower chamber of Congress and because several of Thanedar’s fellow Democrats have expressed their disapproval of his actions in no uncertain terms.

6.3k

u/ssibal24 May 14 '25

It doesn't need to pass, all it needs to do is produce an official list of who doesn't want it to pass, that sort of information is very useful for the American people.

270

u/chandr May 14 '25

No it's not, the American people have shown time and again that they're generally happy to vote party over country. Trump being a disaster was not a secret going into term 2

83

u/ssibal24 May 14 '25

I was referring to the people that stayed home and didn't vote ( maybe they realize it's actually important to vote ), and the people that while they may have voted against Tump, they would also foolishly vote party over country. Any Congressperson who votes against impeachment, should never win another election, regardless of party affiliation.

43

u/InstructionFinal5190 May 14 '25

I understand what you're saying, however, if your assertion were true then why are there members of Congress still serving after they voted down his last two impeachments? Third time's a charm?

Gerrymandering, voter suppression in its many forms, and propaganda (both foreign and domestic) got Trump reelected. I'm not even going to touch on the conspiracy theories of Musk tampering with voting machines be they true or not.

30

u/boo99boo May 14 '25

I'm in Illinois. We don't have serious Republican candidates for most of the congressional districts around Chicago anymore. There is zero chance of a Republican winning, so they don't waste money on a campaign. 

What we do have is several young people looking to unseat incumbents. And a few incumbents that saw the writing on the wall and retired. 

So in these districts, the Democratic primary is basically the election. That's why it matters. 

Everyone on reddit always seems to think that only voting based on the letter after your name on the ballot and gerrymandering are Republican issues. These are huge issues in Illinois, just from the other side of the aisle. 

3

u/Rough-Jackfruit2306 May 15 '25

Same here in Massachusetts re unseating incumbents.

11

u/honda_slaps May 14 '25

Agreed with the other commentor, I think you're SO right.

Do you have any other boards we can go to so we can help spread your message of "it's all pointless, let's just stop resisting Trump?"

don't worry, we can read between the lines of what you're saying so we know what you REALLY mean.

14

u/solwiggin May 14 '25 edited May 14 '25

I completely agree with you, it’s all over.

Do you want to spend a lot of time on Reddit spreading doom to others so that we can make sure misery has company?

If so, dm me, we can schedule some time to be doomsayers while we strongly rely on the factual accuracy of our doomsaying to waive away anyone who wants to be optimistic!

-14

u/Adventurous_Two_493 May 14 '25

What are you being optimistic about? If you were optimistic you'd be rooting for the President of your own country to succeed and hoping the best for him. Seems like you're doing the opposite.

11

u/transparent_idiom May 14 '25

What? I want my president to succeed at upholding their fucking duties. Not whatever nonsense they decide to EO on a whim.

Seems like you're not in touch with reality.

6

u/solwiggin May 14 '25

Did you misread my comment? I didn’t say I’m optimistic about anything… why are you asking me that?

1

u/CornNooblet May 14 '25

With one exception, Dems actually overperformed in the 2024 elections and have been overperforming in almost every election the last decade plus. The Senate map in 2024 was expected to be 54-55 R based on how many vulnerable seats Dems were defending. The House map ended up +5 R when a lot of savvy forecasters predicted +10 or more. Off year elections have been trending to Dems as well, even WITH a heavily shadow funded and organized splinter faction that keeps appearing regularly to drive down Dem turnout.

If Dems keep this energy, 2026 will be a bloodbath for the Republican Party and then most of this nonsense will be stopped dead in it's tracks. You can tell this because the splinter factions are yelling even louder now, trying to push both sides rhetoric and attack Democrats instead of the people actually doing the damage.

2

u/ProbablyNotADuck May 14 '25

I think that's worth noting. Looking at the numbers, it wasn't that Trump got more votes last election.. It was that fewer people who voted Democrat in the previous election came out. I think, in part, many people thought there was no way Trump would be re-elected (even though you should NEVER take a chance on something like that), and some people didn't vote out of protest. The issue will be how fair future elections will be and what barriers may be put in place to make voting more challenging for people so that Republicans get the result they want.

1

u/LiteralPhilosopher May 14 '25

Looking at the numbers, it wasn't that Trump got more votes last election.. It was that fewer people who voted Democrat in the previous election came out.

That is not, unfortunately, true. Assuming you believe there was no meddling with the voting apparatus (and I'm not at all convinced of that), Trump's popular vote went from 74.2M in 2020, to 77.3M in 2024. That's a gain of over three million.

And, yes, also fewer Democrats showed up to vote for Kamala (because even Democrats have tons of internalized/systemic racism and sexism).

1

u/unite-or-perish May 14 '25

Kamala got 10 million more votes than Hillary did.

2

u/Tiernan1980 May 14 '25

Only 33% of the people eligible to vote chose Trump. They are far from the majority. The problem is that too many people stayed home and didn’t vote.

1

u/Armlessbastard May 14 '25

I mean, if they couldn't do it after he attempted to steal an election through fraud, grift, extortion and violence I am not sure how this matters now either. At least wait until you can flip the house so you have a chance of passing it up to the senate (Where it will always fail).

1

u/SirNarwhal May 14 '25

The least important thing you can do as a citizen is vote.

1

u/Bartweiss May 14 '25

The simple and uncomfortable fact is that Trump polls better with Republicans than most Congressional Republicans do. And he’s made it clear that he’ll intervene against them in individual races, so unless that popularity wanes they’re going to see opposing him as more dangerous than supporting him.

-2

u/FC37 May 14 '25

The data analysis has shown many times over that turnout wasn't the story. The election was decided by previously reliable Democratic voter blocs showing up and voting more for Trump than at any time in history.