Trump impeachment explained: What happens next after historic vote?
Nancy Pelosi is threatening to hold the articles back, seeking leverage and control over the Senate
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Shortly after the house voted to impeach Donald Trump, speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters that she had no timeline for handing over the charges to the Senate.
The comments, in some respects, reflected the time of the year. With the historic vote landing on 18 December, this crucial stage of the affair comes just a week before Christmas. The Senate, which will serve as courtroom and jury over the house’s charges, had already left Washington, anyway, and is not to return until January.
The president seized upon Ms Pelosi’s comments quickly, and went as far as to suggest – falsely – in a tweet on Thursday that Democrats would “lose by default” if they don’t show up for his Senate trial.
But, Mr Trump’s misinformation aside, there remains a lot of work to be done before the impeachment saga is concluded.
Here’s what you need to know.
What is Ms Pelosi threatening when she says she may hold onto the articles of impeachment?
Simply put, Ms Pelosi is trying to retain some control and leverage in the proceedings before she hands the reins to Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell.
Following the historic, party-line vote on Wednesday, Ms Pelosi said that she could hold onto the articles until it became clear that the Senate would hold a fair hearing – which Republicans in the world’s “greatest deliberative body” have notably refused to promise.
The threat underlines the reality that none of this is finished: even the terms of the Senate trial remain undecided Democrats have complained that Mr McConnell – a fellow Republican and accessory to Mr Trump’s antics – may rush the Senate trial, while refusing to call witnesses or seek more evidence.
How have Republicans responded?
Republicans have been, and remain, defiant.
They have taken their cues from the president, and cast the whole impeachment affair as a politicised sideshow, and an effort to undermine the will of the voters in 2016 (notably, they paradoxically complain that Democrats rushed the process, and also that they took too long by bringing this vote three years into the president’s first term).
Some Republicans have suggested they would like to subpoena potential witnesses like Joe Biden or his son Hunter, claiming that those two are the true miscreants. Others have simply stated they are not impartial jurors in the trial. (Mr McConnell himself said he has no need to be impartial).
Following Ms Pelosi’s threat, Mr McConnell’s adviser Josh Holmes suggested Democrats are worried about the outcome of the Senate trial, and thus threatening holding back. “They are seriously entertaining holding a grenade with the pin pulled rather than facing what happens when they send it over McConnell’s wall,” he told the New York Times.
When might we see a Senate trial?
Ms Pelosi’s threat aside, outside pressures do exist – and it is likely that we will see a Senate trial some time early next year when congress returns to Washington.
There are a couple of issues at play here: the impeachment vote came less than a year before the 2020 election, and Democrats are unlikely to want to risk giving the impression that they’re using impeachment – an event they have repeatedly claimed they view as a “solemn” affair – as a political tool. (Ms Pelosi even gave some Democrats a stern glare when a few began cheering the president’s successful impeachment on Thursday).
Holding back breaks from precedent, though there isn’t much precedent to go off of, in December 1998, after Bill Clinton was impeached, Republicans immediately handed over their impeachment documents (the Senate was not in session then either, so the trial was held in the new year).
Are there short- and long-term effects of impeachment to consider?
Sure. Several 2020 Democratic presidential contenders are senators, so they would be forced to return to Washington right as Iowa voters prepare to caucus. That could certainly have an impact on the race, leaving the likes of Joe Biden and Pete Buttigieg out on the campaign trail, while senators Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar and Michael Bennet battle it out in the Senate (to be clear: that’s where the TVs will be, so maybe it’s not such a bad deal).
Beyond that, impeachment could affect the 2020 general election as well. It remains to be seen how impeachment will have an impact on swing-district house Democrats who stuck their necks out after flipping Trump districts in 2018. Polls so far show pretty stagnant public opinion amid impeachment, with Mr Trump’s approval remaining in the low- to mid-40 percentile, and impeachment support hovering around 50 per cent.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments