Republican Senators can convict trump by not showing up for the vote.

[pwb]

Two thirds of those present is all it takes. If 25 Republican Senators who feel Honored to serve and love our country miss the vote trump is gone and they are off the hook more or less. It is the easy way to avoid the perceived backlash from trump. IMO anyway. They were neither for or against but got rid of him forever in Government.

[FreepFryer]

1. Which means that if what Trump did wasn't illegal, those GOP senators could be physically prevented

From reaching the chamber to vote and Democrats would be justified in doing so.

Of course, we wouldnt do that because it is illegal, we arent fascist bastards, and doing that is antithetical to d/Democratic values.

[Coleman]

10. No, The Constition prohibits the detention

and interference of legislators are on there way to a session.

[FreepFryer]

11. Uh, We knew that. Thanks for stating the obvious. Jeez. (Nt)

[TlalocW]

12. So what you're saying is that we have to be clever

And distract them somehow so that it doesn't fall into physical restraint... I like the devious way you think.

TlalocW

[stopbush]

2. One can always hope, but most likely any R who missed the vote

would get primaried for not coming to tRump’s aid and voting for acquittal when they had the chance. It’s a lose/lose situation.

[OAITW r.2.0]

3. Given the current make up of the Senate Republicans....

I believe many are going to be "no shows" when the time comes to vote. McConnell made the 1st impeachment easy on his caucus. They won't have that option this time. Being the calculating cowards that they are, this will be the route many will take on avoiding a vote.

[onenote]

14. I doubt there will be any no-shows

Unless a Senator has a good reason, such as being hospitalize, they will show up, They would be pilloried if they failed to participate in such an important proceeding.

A few might show and decided to vote "present" but that won't impact the need for 67 aye votes to convict.

[tinrobot]

4. They can claim they're boycotting the senate trial or something.

Make it seem to the rubes like they're standing up by sitting out.

[Wounded Bear]

8. Several have announced they would "boycott" the trial...

though I don't think any have said they will boycott the final vote.

Perhaps they need a ruling that nobody who did not sit through the trial can cast a vote.

[TwilightZone]

5. Not happening.

This sure is a popular notion, but it's unrealistic.

"they are off the hook more or less"

No, they're not. If those who are in red states abstain, their political careers are just as over as if they voted to convict.

And why would you think that would keep them from Trump's wrath? He'd consider them just as much traitors to his cause than those who vote to convict.

[pwb]

6. Want me to take my post down?

Lighten up.

[TwilightZone]

7. Nowhere did I say that.

On the other hand, if you can't handle some mild criticism of a clearly unrealistic post, don't post.

[pwb]

9. You told me!

Your opinion means little if you have that attitude about discussion.

[Retrograde]

13. And they can spin it to make themselves look good!

"Of course I support Trump! That's why I stayed away from this sham trial the Demmy-crats rigged up to waste time that we could have spent serving out donors, I mean, constituents". They're politicians - they know how to twist words.