01/17/2020 17:33Knurled

Impeachment is the first part of the process, and is performed by the House of Representatives. It is the political equivalent of being "indicted" - a formal *accusation* of something.

The second part is the trial which is held in the Senate. It requires a supermajority (2/3) vote to convict.

Two possible interpretations of this question's outcomes:

FIRST:
No *attempted* Impeachment (no longer valid);
Attempted impeachment first term, but no articles of impeachment passed in HR = "unsuccessful" (no longer valid)
Attempted impeachment, passed in HR (current status);
Attempted impeachment in both terms, but neither passes HR (no longer valid)
Attempted impeachment in second term, but does not pass in HR (probably no longer valid)
Attempted impeachment in second term, and articles of impeachment passed in HR (probably no longer valid)

SECOND:
No articles of impeachment passed in HR at all (no longer valid)
Impeachment passed in HR, but no conviction in Senate trial (possible outcome)
Impeachment passed in HR, AND conviction in Senate trial (possible outcome)
Impeachment passed twice (in separate terms), but no conviction for either in Senate trial
Impeachment passes in second term only, but no conviction in trial (no longer valid)
Impeachment passes in second term only, and conviction in trial (no longer valid)

The last two outcomes of each are not valid as stated, since they implicitly exclude any occurrence in the first term.

For the first interpretation two additional possible outcomes have not been stated:
Articles of Impeachment passed ("successful") in both terms (perhaps the first trial ended in acquittal, or additional articles passed before end of trial)
Articles of Impeachment passed in first term, but not the second. (still an open possibility)

The second interpretation is more self-consistent - no additional outcomes are necessary.

That's why I lean to this one in my predicting.

Has anyone heard from @Stephen Tilley, the author of this question?

   01/17/2020 17:05dlilley

Kruijs - Initiating the process isn't relevant. Maybe they wouldn't have had enough votes and *that* would be an unsuccessful impeachment.

"During the first and second terms" would apply if the inquiry began in the first term and the vote happened in the second. That would've been possible, but it isn't what happened.

Will Trump be Convicted by the Senate?

(1)   01/17/2020 15:16Theory

trump was successfully impeached December 18, 2019. How does the outcome of the trial pertain?

   01/17/2020 05:30kruijs

My position on whether or not impeachment is considered 'successful':

If the formal procedure of impeachment is not initiated successfully, the president is in effect not impeached.

So, 'successfully' is not referring to the fact that the impeachment process is formally opened as such.

Also, the wording 'successful' vs 'not successul' refers to the impeachment result. Not to impeaching. That's also the reason because of which there is only an option 'impeachment during first term - successful'. The question would lack the 'impeachment during first and second term - both successful'.

And by this, right now the question cannot settle and only the 'not at all' option by now is no longer valid.

Other options are depending on the outcome of the impeachment.

   01/17/2020 03:10dlilley

There is nothing ambiguous here - Trump has been successfully impeached - and in his first term.

“Resolved, that Donald J. Trump, President of the United States is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the United States Senate.”

   12/23/2019 03:50Knurled

I agree that the question is ambiguous. A straight-forward interpretation could be that the "successful" refers to removal from office.
As it is, even the impeachment itself is arguably not complete at the current time:
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2019/dec/20/noah-feldman-democrat-impeachment-witness-says-tru/

   12/23/2019 01:19infernalmachine

Sorry, but I gotta disagree with the last 2 posters. Trump has been impeached since last week. The votes in the House passed, so he is successfully impeached in the first term. Period.

1) Removal from office is a different thing from being impeached. It (removal) is not relevant to this question. Yes, some people use the term "impeached" when they mean "removed", but it's not a correct usage, so it can't be used to settle a question/market. Also "success" applies to impeachment in this question, not to the trial which isn't even mentioned in the question.

2) So, I feel that either the question settles as "During first term - successful", or that the question is seen to be poorly articulated, with too much ambiguity in its language, and therefore is voided.

3) The issue of the missing options is interesting. Either it means the question is incomplete, or that the questioner intended it to be settled as soon as 1 option becomes true. Yes, some of the options would not become knowable until Trump's presidency is over, but others could be. In other words, some options only become possible if other options fail. Example: "During second term - but not successful" implies that no articles of impeachment were voted on in the first term -- otherwise you end up with options overlapping each other. This type of question is fairly common, even if it is logically dubious.

4) The more I think about it, the more I lean toward voiding the question, because there are clearly different possible interpretations of "impeachment" and "successful", and asserting one interpretation over all others will leave some players feeling cheated. dlilley sought clarification on this weeks ago, and clear definitions of these terms should have been given before impeachment was happening.

   12/22/2019 22:35charlesf

I agree with Knurled. Still a long way to go. Looks like the top option can be eliminated as well as the bottom 2 regarding the second term only. 3 options remaining. If trial is successful the question settles unless he runs in 2020 to get back in office. Not sure if that is allowed. If unsuccessful and he remains in office, Successful is eliminated leaving 2 options left. If he loses in November the question can settle. If he wins reelection this question will have to wait until his second term ends.

I believe there is 1 other possibility that wasn't included in the original question. He could survive impeachment this time and then be impeached and successfully removed from office in his second term.

Instead of removing the last option, is it possible to change it to During first term - unsuccessful - During second term - successful?

He could also be impeached multiple times in a second term if he survives this time and gets reelected. Too much for now but could make a good question if he gets a second term.

   12/21/2019 22:11Knurled

The question is not ready to be settled until his SECOND term is finished.

   12/19/2019 02:15dlilley

"Trump Impeached for Abuse of Power and Obstruction of Congress"
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/18/us/politics/trump-impeached.html

   11/23/2019 14:38dlilley

So this question is just about the House.

   11/23/2019 14:37dlilley

The House impeaches - then the Senate votes on whether the perp is removed from office.

   11/20/2019 12:59uspais

Is the question related to both house and the senate? Or just the house?

   11/16/2019 17:04dlilley

Website of the US House of Representative's intelligence committee, historically one of the most sober and non-partisan organs in American: https://intelligence.house.gov/defendourdemocracy/

   11/04/2019 23:55dlilley

"Impeachment" doesn't mean removal from office:

"Although proceedings were delayed...Clinton was impeached on December 19, 1998, by the House of Representatives on grounds of perjury to a grand jury (by a 228–206 vote) and obstruction of justice (by a 221–212 vote)."

- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impeachment_of_Bill_Clinton