Share this page!

Andrew Prokop Profile picture
Twitter logo
13 Jan, 3 tweets, 1 min read
Relevant again today
I guess "I want to support impeachment but I can't because I'm scared of violence" sounds more defensible than "I will vote to support Donald Trump because it's in my political interest to do so, just like I've been doing for years."
I'm not saying they're not scared. Scary stuff happened!

But if you're a Republican looking to justify your opposition to impeachment to Dems or journalists, "it's in my political interest" isn't an answer that makes you come off well, even if it may be the most accurate one.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with Andrew Prokop

Andrew Prokop Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @awprokop

Andrew Prokop Profile picture
14 Jan
"Elites" get a bad rap lately but the reality is that if Republican elites purely represented their voters’ wishes, the post-election period would've been a whole lot uglier as the GOP “fought” for Trump at every level (certifications, electors, more support for Cong. challenge)
The reason most didn’t is because most of those GOP elites still have an epistemic understanding of the election results that is on some level based in reality — that there was no widespread fraud and that Trump is lying constantly about this.
So whether it was swing state governors or state officials, state legislature leaders, Barr, McConnell, Pence, they largely averted their eyes when asked to actually *do* anything to change the results.

Because of this shared factual understanding that Trump's case is BS
Read 7 tweets
Andrew Prokop Profile picture
14 Jan
It will take the votes of 17 Republican senators to convict Trump at his impeachment trial.

So I was curious — how many sitting Republican senators has Trump attacked or insulted on Twitter?

(Thread, now-deleted tweets saved here: thetrumparchive.com )
1. Mitch McConnell (R-KY) ("couldn't get it done," "NO FIGHT") ImageImage
2. John Thune (R-SD): "Mitch's boy," "weakness," "political career over!!!" Image
Read 13 tweets
Andrew Prokop Profile picture
8 Jan
The "25th Amendment legislation" Pelosi references would need to be passed over President Trump's veto, meaning the threshold for success (2/3 of both houses) would actually be higher than for impeachment Image
I wrote about Raskin's 25th amendment bill last year. Though it might make sense as a reform idea, it makes no sense as a crisis response

vox.com/2020/10/9/2150…
The bill Pelosi is referring to would not invoke the 25th Amendment. It would set up a commission that — if Mike Pence agreed — would invoke the amendment.

So the bill itself still wouldn't get around the Pence problem, even if it somehow became law

Read 4 tweets
Andrew Prokop Profile picture
7 Jan
For impeachment to have any practical consequence, at least 18 Senate Republicans would have to agree to remove Trump from office (or ban him from future office)

The sole Republican who was willing to do so last time, Romney, indicated yesterday he'd prefer waiting it out.
Democrats may have moral or political reasons to pursue impeachment, but the "getting Trump out of office early" really does come down to Republicans and there's no way around it.
Ben Sasse says this morning he will "consider" Democratic impeachment articles. First public sign of any GOP senator's openness to removal.

Read 7 tweets
Andrew Prokop Profile picture
4 Jan
I think any take on the nature of the "Republican Party" re: Trump's election-stealing effort really has to grapple with the fact that no R swing state governor, swing state legislature leader, judge helped him in any substantive way. And McConnell and Barr didn't either
What's unfolding now is that Trump is making corrupt requests (that don't seem to be working), and that many House Rs and some Senate Rs (though not Senate R leaders) are willing to back him in a congressional vote that's 100% certain to fail.
Judges overwhelmingly spurned him, as did GA/AZ statewide officials. McConnell says it's over. Barr said no fraud. GA/AZ/WI/MI/PA state legislature leaders responded to calls for their intervention by putting their fingers in the ears and saying "la la la I can't hear you."
Read 5 tweets
Andrew Prokop Profile picture
1 Jan
There's some surprisingly good stuff in Congress's end-of-year bills that hasn't gotten much attention because it doesn't really fit anyone's narrative

One is the ban on anonymous shell companies @cjcmichel discusses in this great thread and calls "the most sweeping counter-kleptocracy reforms in decades—potentially ever"
The coronabus package also contained "the most substantial energy legislation passed in the US in over a decade" per @drvolts who discusses its provisions, including major restrictions on HFCs, here volts.wtf/p/congress-mig…
Read 7 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

Like this author's thread?

Get emails when @awprokop has new unrolls!

Check out other threads from @awprokop!

Read all threads by @awprokop