In an impeachment trial where the Senate is deadlocked at 50:50 votes, can the VP vote

[jpak]

to break the deadlock?

[Cartaphelius]

1. NO!

[wryter2000]

2. Doesn't matter for conviction

You need two third to convict.

I guess the VP could break a tie on rules

[jpak]

4. That is what I was wondering - can Pence intervene on rule votes? i.e., witnesses, document requests

[kentuck]

5. I think this might happen more than once in the trial.

Republicans would love for Roberts to make all the decisions if witnesses are called. I think he might play a bigger role than presently visualized.

[MineralMan]

6. The only time a one vote majority decides in an impeachment is on rules questions.

I don't know whether the VP enters into such questions, actually, or if he intervenes only on bills. That will be somewhere in the overall Rules of the Senate, and I don't have time to go hunt for it.

[kentuck]

7. The VP has no role in Impeachment trial.

...is my understanding?

The Chief Justice breaks all ties. He can be over-ridden by simple majority.

[MineralMan]

9. Hmm...I didn't know that.

If that's true, we'll probably see it at work a time or two. Or, we might not. Unless a few Republicans break away on rules votes, it may not come up at all. I'll be glad if some do, but I'm not counting on it at this point.

I believe, though, that McConnell will have to cave on witnesses and documents, actually. Trump appears to want them, too, although that's really stupid of him. Trump wants this thing to be over. He doesn't want it hanging there over his head, I'm sure. Impetuous lout that he is, he will probably rant even louder if the trial is delayed. He probable believes he will win in the end, and he might be right, so he may tell McConnell to let the witnesses come in.

I'm sure there are powerful influences I don't know about. That seems obvious. Who they are and what they want may be the deciding factor in many decisions.

[Takket]

14. that is true.........

forget where i read that, but the VP is not involved with the procedural voting in the Senate trial because he/she stands to gain from conviction, so they are not part of the process. The Chief Justice breaks any tied voted.

Since a tie for conviction is mathematically impossible, the CJ has no part in that vote.

[wryter2000]

8. Actually...

I'd be pretty happy if we got to 50/50 on something. That would take a few people from the other side.

[SCantiGOP]

10. only three

Romney, Murkowski and Collins, and then need a 4th vote to get our side to 51-49.

[wryter2000]

11. Four of them would be something

A lot better than the House. Maybe my expectations are too low.

[maxsolomon]

18. Collins won't be that 3rd.

She only has concerns, not convictions.

51-49 across the board, unless there's another Republic who believes in their Oath that I'm not aware of.

[in2herbs]

12. Maybe it's a belated Christmas wish to myself but what if no R's showed up for the vote. Since

the rule is 2/3 of those present and all D's were present and voted to impeach and remove, wouldn't this give the R's an out on the campaign trail to say to Trump supporters that they didn't vote to impeach???

[NewJeffCT]

13. My thought was

that if Trump loses the election, Dem Senators should quietly make plans to stay in DC over Thanksgiving and impeach him using 2/3 of present senators

[Takket]

15. The Senate needs a qurorum to conduct business. Dems can't make it alone.....

[NewJeffCT]

17. There are always a handful present

of both parties so they can do pro forma sessions and not officially be in recess - Mitch wouldn't allow an official recess under Obama to prevent recess appointments and has continued that under Trump, I believe.

[MineralMan]

16. That's not going to happen, I'm certain.

Every last senator will be there for the vote, unless they're hospitalized and in intensive care.

Nobody's going to not show up. Not one.