Archive for the 'Impeachment' Category


This is bigly yuge

Tuesday, September 24th, 2019

I must confess I wasn’t expecting Trump to be impeached during his first term, given the make up of the Senate and the high bar to convict a President the Democratic Party controlled House of Representatives would not begin impeachment hearings but as NBC reports

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, who for months resisted efforts to launch impeach proceedings against President Donald Trump, will announce a formal inquiry on Tuesday, according to two Democratic sources close to her.

Pelosi’s change of heart comes as dozens of House Democrats — now more than two-thirds of the caucus — have come out in support of an impeachment inquiry in the wake of reports that Trump may have withheld aid to Ukraine to pressure officials there to investigate the son of political rival Joe Biden.

Pelosi, D-Calif., is expected to announce the development after a meeting of the Democratic caucus she called for 4 p.m. ET on Tuesday.

Going after Joe Biden has demonstrated Newton’s Third Law of Motion but I do think this is a bad idea from the Democratic Party, as Nate Silver notes below this avenue of impeachment wasn’t popular when it involved Russia and will it be any different if involves Ukraine? It could end up polarising the country further and only make Democratic leaning voters happy.

But as the tweet below things can rapidly change (h/t to PBer Alistair for posting the tweet from Kevin M. Kruse.)

Overall I’m sticking to my betting position, the Senate will not vote to convict Trump under its current membership.




Is Trump really just a 17% chance to be impeached?

Thursday, August 8th, 2019

Graphic – Recent YouGov polling on impeaching Trump

Impeachment is a legal procedure, with an indictment delivered by the House and a trial conducted by the Senate. But, assuming that there is a plausible yet arguable case for it, the procedure naturally resolves itself into a political process like any other.

To recap, impeachment is defined as the House passing one or more articles of impeachment, by a simple majority vote. The House has 435 voting members, of which 235 are Democrats. A strict party-line vote on impeachment would therefore pass. Any such articles of impeachment are likely to originate from the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Democratic Congressman Jerry Nadler, and it is worth noting that the Committee is edging towards possibly recommending such articles this autumn:

Once a President is impeached, the trial by the Senate – with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding – requires a two-thirds majority for his conviction, and automatic removal from office. This is exceptionally unlikely given that 53 of the 100 Senators are Republicans, though, as with Nixon, it is possible that the mood of the Senate could change in light of any new information. But, for the purposes of this article, let us assume that Donald Trump’s impeachment would largely be “for show”, much like Bill Clinton’s.

The experience of the Clinton impeachment – an apparent electoral backlash against the Republicans for pursuing it – is one of the main reasons that the Democratic leadership (mostly in the form of Nancy Pelosi) has been keen to downplay the possibility. A second reason is to protect her members that represent swing districts [who, after all, are the ones who make up the majority]. Only one Democratic Congressman from a district won by Trump has come out for impeachment so far. Moderate (i.e. swing) voters are slightly against impeachment at present,  in line with the country as a whole.

At this juncture, it is worth noting that there may also be tactical arguments for impeachment. Not impeaching Trump could allow him to run in 2020 using lines such as: “Mueller cleared me, and the tragic Democrats didn’t even dare to impeach. NO COLLUSION!!!” But I think it is fair to say that the main motivation for impeaching Trump is simply the Democrats’ belief that he did indeed commit “high crimes and misdemeanors” – and, even worse, they might have allowed him to win the 2016 election.

Increasing Democratic internal pressure

Nancy Pelosi may not be able to withstand the pressure from within the Democratic Party for impeachment for much longer. In the wake of Robert Mueller’s testimony to Congress, in which he all but made clear that he would have recommended prosecution of Donald Trump, were he not the President, a procession of House Democrats went public with their desire to see a formal impeachment inquiry begin. The psychological barrier of 118 – “a majority of the majority” – has been breached. And that number can only realistically climb: this is a one-way ratchet, with every new tweet from Trump potentially converting more Democrats to the cause.

There is also electoral pressure on House Democrats to come out for impeachment in the shape of Congressional primaries: if you represent a very liberal district (just as Pelosi does) your primary electorate are likely to be highly pro-impeachment (perhaps 70%+), so you would need to be pretty sure of your personal appeal to go against that. It is for the same reason that the majority of the Democratic Presidential candidates have recommended impeachment – though none of the serious contenders want to focus on it. Such cues add further to the pressure on Pelosi.

5.7 – a good value bet

Turning to the betting, Republican (but anti-Trump) commentator Bill Kristol certainly noticed the stream of House Democrats:

It was this tweet – and notably his 50-50 prediction – that prompted me to check up on the Betfair market on impeachment, where you can still back impeachment at 5.7 (17.5%). In the interests of disclosure I should say that I already had a substantial pro-impeachment position with Betfair Sportsbook, which I had partially laid off on the Exchange. In the light of the developments I have chronicled above, I reversed my Exchange position so that I am currently very substantially pro-impeachment. It may not (yet) be 50-50, but I think it is more like 40-60 or so.

Finally, it is also always worth comparing US Betfair markets with their PredictIt equivalent. PredictIt is an academic research project that has a derogation to allow US “punters” to play, similarly to the Iowa Electronic Markets. However, there are two key limitations per market that may affect the pricing – each customer is limited to a $850 liability, and each market is limited to 5,000 customers. Bearing these caveats in mind, it’s still notable that the PredictIt impeachment market is currently at 26%, markedly higher than Betfair.

There are sound political reasons why the Democrats should not impeach Donald Trump. But that doesn’t necessarily mean they’ll be able to stop themselves. I think the 5.7 is an excellent value bet.

Tissue Price


The power and politics of pardon

Sunday, September 9th, 2018

Under the US constitution, an American president has a virtually untrammelled power to pardon, or commute the sentence of, anyone convicted of a Federal offence (but not offences under State law). It is a power completely personal to the president, who can exercise it for any reason, or for no good reason, and it has been used surprisingly often: 1,927 times by Barack Obama, for example. Although there is a government department, the Office of the Pardon Attorney, through which applications for presidential clemency are usually routed, there is no obligation on the president to follow that process.

In many cases, the power is used to redress obvious injustices or excessive sentences in the US criminal law system. For example, few people would quarrel with Trump’s order to release Alice Marie Johnson (who was convicted to life imprisonment in 1996 for drug dealing offences), even if it required celebrity intervention to get the president’s attention. Sometimes the power is used to help heal national divisions, as in Carter’s pardon of all Vietnam draft dodgers. Some examples are purely symbolic, the most recent being Trump’s posthumous pardon of boxer Jack Johnson for the quaintly American (but racially supercharged) 1912 crime of “transporting a woman across state lines for immoral purposes”.

However, there is nothing to prevent a president from exercising the power of clemency capriciously, for political reasons, or as a favour to cronies or family. When controversial Sherriff Joe Arpaio was convicted of contempt of court for refusing to comply with a court order to stop racial profiling, Trump pardoned him before he was even sentenced. An outrageous example of partisan meddling in the justice system? Perhaps, but not obviously more so than Clinton’s pardon of Marc Rich, coincidentally after Rich’s ex-wife made large donations to the Democratic Party and the Clinton Foundation.

Various of Trump’s staff and associates have already been convicted of or pleaded guilty to crimes, although so far these nearly all relate to matters unrelated to the Trump campaign. Criminal investigations continue, but Trump has made it clear that he regards them as politically motivated. Whatever the outcome of those investigations, Trump can if he wishes simply pardon anyone convicted. The mere existence of this power of pardon blunts the leverage of investigators to coerce potential witnesses into testifying in exchange for immunity or plea-bargaining.

All this means that those looking to the criminal justice system to bring down the Trump administration, via his associates, are probably going to be disappointed, irrespective of who else, if anyone, ends up being indicted; legally, he holds the Trump* card. He can even pardon in advance anyone who might in future be charged with any offence arising from the Mueller investigation.

Of course, it would be shameless to exercise that power for his cronies or his family, but no-one ever accused Donald Trump of insufficient shamelessness. His supporters already think that the investigations are politically motivated so the political cost would be minimal. In any case, since President Clinton used his power to pardon his own brother, and to pardon Susan McDougal (the Clintons’ business partner in the Whitewater land deal), the moral high ground has already been vacated.

Short of impeachment – which looks numerically near-impossible, given the need for a two-thirds majority in the Senate – Trump’s opponents will have to think of something else. How about selecting a compelling candidate for the 2020 presidential election, and mounting a strong campaign? It might just work.

* Beat that pun, TSE!

Richard Nabavi


Betting on the year of Trump’s impeachment

Sunday, January 7th, 2018

The Democrats might not have the votes to convict but politically it might be helpful for them if the GOP vote to clear Trump.

Paddy Power have a market up on the year that Donald Trump is impeached. The Paddy Power terms are very clear, this bet doesn’t require the Senate to vote to convict, just the House of Representatives to vote to successfully impeach

The current polls indicate that the Democrats are on course to take the House later on this year, and I’m struggling to see how they don’t take the House, barring the tensions with North Korea escalating leading to a patriotic Trump surge as Americans back their Commander-in-Chief.

So what happens if the Democrats take back the House formally in January 2019? Given what has already happened I suspect the Democrats in the House will come under a lot of pressure from their own supporters to begin impeachment proceedings, ‘Lock him up’ might even be a campaign slogan.

There might also be an attractive proposition to screw up the primary process and 2020 election cycle by tying GOP Senators to Trump, with 22 of 33 of the Senate seats up for re-election in 2020 being held by GOP Senators. Those Senators if they voted not to convict Trump might face an electoral reckoning shortly thereafter for clearing Trump and he maintains his current dire personal ratings.

Very rarely does an incumbent President face a credible primary challenge. With an ongoing impeachment, I can see a primary challenge from a very credible GOP challenger. That would eliminate one of the great strengths an incumbent President has. Only twice in the last year 85 years has an elected incumbent President lost in a general election.

If Trump is impeached it might not be for things that happened before he became President but things he had done in office. His mental state, as evidenced by yesterday’s tweet storm, coupled with the potential to illegally obstruct Robert Mueller’s investigations you can see how Donald Trump is impeached for things that haven’t happened yet.

That’s why I’ve backed impeachment happening in either 2019 or 2020, the latter is a lot better chance of happening than the 33/1 odds imply.

Hat tip to Tissue Price for alerting me to this market.