Senate on FIRE as Lawmakers DEMAND Trump Impeachment Vote Within Days | Rachel Maddow

Okay, so impeachment is back, and I'm not talking about some fringe idea that'll never go anywhere. I'm talking about 140 members of Congress voting to move forward with impeaching Donald Trump. Again, yeah, you heard that right. 140 lawmakers just said, yes, let's impeach the president.

And now the Senate is staring down the barrel of another impeachment trial, right as the 2026 campaign season kicks into high gear. But before we go any further, real quick, let's be honest. You can't really trust mainstream media anymore. And if you just want to support what we're doing, join us. Be part of the community that actually cares about the truth.

All right, let's get back to the video. The question is on the second article of impeachment. Senators, how say you? Is the respondent Donald John Trump guilty or not guilty? The clerk will call the roll.

Mr. Alexander. Not guilty. Ms. Baldwin.

Guilty.

Mr. Barrasso. guilty mr. Bennett guilty. Mr Booker. Guilty. Mr Bozeman. Not guilty. Mr Braun. Not guilty. Mr. Brown. Guilty. Mr. Burr. Not guilty. Ms. Cantwell. Guilty. Mrs. Capito.

Not guilty. Mr. Cardin. Guilty.

Mr. Carper. Guilty. Mr. Caseyen, guilty. Mr. Carper, guilty. Mr. Casey, guilty. Mr. Cassidy, not guilty. Ms. Collins, not guilty. Mr. Coons, guilty. Mr. Cornyn, not guilty.

Ms. Cortez Masto, guilty. Mr. Cotton, not guilty. Mr. Crapo. Not guilty. Mr. Cruz. So, here's what went down.

Democratic Representative Al Green from Texas has been on a mission to impeach Trump, and on December 11th, he forced a vote in the House. Now, technically, the House voted to table his impeachment resolution, which means they blocked it from moving forward immediately. Democratic leadership actually joined Republicans to shut it down. But here's the wild part.

140 members still voted to advance it. That's a massive number. And it's way higher than a similar vote that happened back in June. Let me put that in perspective. We're not talking about a handful of progressive firebrands voting symbolically. We're talking about nearly a third of the entire House saying, yeah, we should impeach

Trump right now. That's not nothing. That's a significant block of Congress that's ready to put the sitting president on trial. And Al Green? He's not backing down. He gave this absolutely fiery floor speech, where he accused Trump of normalizing political

violence and announced what he called a countdown to impeachment. He said he's going to file more articles before the Christmas break because—and I'm quoting here— "...we cannot allow him to normalize the notion that you can just hang members of Congress because you don't agree with their position." Think about that for a second.

A sitting member of Congress is saying the president has normalized threatening to hang lawmakers. That's not hyperbole. That's not political theater. That's a direct accusation that Trump is making political violence acceptable, and 140 members of Congress agreed enough to vote for impeachment.

Now, here's where it gets really interesting. This isn't Green's first rodeo. He's introduced multiple impeachment articles against Trump this year. One accused Trump of abusing presidential power. Another said Trump usurped Congress's power to declare war. So, there's a whole stack of impeachment attempts building up in the 119th Congress,

and each time, more members are getting on board. The House leadership shut this one down, sure, but the momentum is building, and that puts the Senate in an impossible position. Because if the House actually passes articles of impeachment, the Senate has to decide, do they hold a trial or do they bury it? And either choice is political dynamite.

If they hold a trial, it dominates the news cycle for weeks or months. It becomes the only thing anyone talks about. Trump's agenda grinds to a halt. Republicans running in swing districts have to defend him on the record, and all the ugliest parts of Trump's behavior get aired out in public hearings for everyone to see. But if they bury it, if they refuse to hold a trial, or just quickly vote to acquit without

looking at the evidence, they look like they're covering up for Trump. They look like they're putting party over country, and that could energize Democrats and Independents heading into 2026. So senators are stuck, and you can already see them posturing, trying to figure out which option hurts them less. Some are quietly hoping the House never actually passes impeachment, so they don't have to

make the choice. Others are preparing their talking points about how impeachment is a partisan witch-hunt, and a few, maybe, are wondering if this is finally the moment they can break with Trump without getting destroyed by his base. And here's the kicker. This impeachment push is happening at the same time as all these other scandals. The Epstein files cover up, the Kennedy Center corruption, the DOJ stonewalling. So, Democrats are building a narrative.

Trump and his people are corrupt, they're above the law, they're threatening democracy, and Congress needs to act. Green explicitly tied his impeachment push to the broader issue of accountability for powerful elites. He's saying, look, if we don't hold Trump accountable for normalizing political violence, for abusing his power for all of it, then we're sending a message that presidents can

do whatever they want. And that message is dangerous. So buckle up, because this is about to get wild. We're going to break down exactly what Green is accusing Trump of. We're going to look at why 140 members voted for impeachment. We're going to explain the Senate's impossible choice.

And we're going to talk about what this means for 2026 and beyond. Let's dive in. All right, so to really understand what's happening here, we need to rewind and look at Al Greene's impeachment campaign, because this didn't just start in December. Greene has been trying to impeach Trump for months, filing multiple resolutions with different accusations.

The first big one was about Trump abusing presidential power. Green argued that Trump was using the office to enrich himself, to punish political enemies, and to undermine democratic institutions. Pretty standard impeachment stuff, right?

But it didn't get much traction at first. Most Democrats were nervous about impeachment because, you know, Trump's base is rabid and they didn't want to energize them. Then Green filed another resolution about Trump, usurping Congress's power to declare war. This one focused on Trump's foreign policy decisions, arguing that he was making military

commitments without congressional approval. Again, a legitimate constitutional argument. Again, not much support initially. But then something changed. Over the summer and fall, Trump's rhetoric got more and more extreme. He started openly talking about jailing political opponents.

He made comments that seemed to encourage violence against lawmakers who opposed him, and Green latched onto that. He made political violence the centerpiece of his latest impeachment push. In late November and early December, Green gave a series of floor speeches that were absolutely scathing. He said Trump was normalizing political violence.

He said Trump was making it acceptable to threaten members of Congress with physical harm if they vote the wrong way. And he specifically called out Trump's rhetoric about hanging lawmakers who don't fall in line. Now you might be thinking, did Trump literally say he wants to hang members of Congress? Well, it's complicated. Trump uses this thing called stochastic terrorism, where he doesn't directly call for violence, but he says things that make his supporters think violence is justified.

Like he'll say, These lawmakers are traitors, and you know what we used to do to traitors, and leave the implication hanging there. He doesn't have to say, Go hang them, because his supporters get the message. And it works.

We've seen an explosion in threats against lawmakers, especially Democrats and Republicans, who criticize Trump. Capitol Police have documented hundreds of serious threats. Some lawmakers have needed security details. And all of it traces back to Trump's rhetoric about those lawmakers being enemies of the people.

So, Green is saying, enough is enough. This is impeachable. A president can't be allowed to create an environment where his supporters think it's okay to threaten violence against Congress. That's a fundamental threat to democracy. That's the president attacking a co-equal branch of government. The December 11th vote was supposed to force the issue.

Green used a procedural tactic that required the House to vote on his impeachment resolution within a few days. No more kicking the can down the road. No more letting leadership quietly shelve it. The House had to take a position. And here's what happened. Democratic leadership, including people like Hakeem Jeffries, voted to table the resolution. They're not ready to go all-in on impeachment.

They think it's too politically risky. They're worried about losing moderate voters. They're worried about the whole thing backfiring, like it did in Trump's first term. But—and this is huge—140 members defied leadership and voted to advance impeachment. That's more than double the number who voted for it in June. That's a massive surge in support. And it shows that the Democratic base is absolutely furious and demanding action.

Who are these 140 members? Well, it's a mix. You've got the progressive wing, obviously, people like AOC and the Squad, who have been calling for accountability from day one. But you've also got more moderate members from competitive districts who are willing to take the political risk because they think impeachment is the right thing to do.

And that's what makes this different from past impeachment attempts. This isn't just the far left going off on their own. This is a broad coalition that includes people who usually try to avoid controversy. That tells you something about how bad things have gotten. Now, let's talk about what happens if the House actually passes articles of impeachment, because that's looking more and more possible.

If Green keeps building support, if a few more scandals break, if Trump's rhetoric gets even more extreme, we could hit a tipping point where a majority of the House says, OK, we have to do this. If that happens, it goes to the Senate, and the Senate has to hold a trial. That's in the Constitution. They can't just ignore it.

Now they can make the trial really short and perfunctory, basically just vote to acquit without seriously considering the evidence. That's what they did in Trump's first impeachment. But they have to do something. And this is where the politics get really complicated, because Senate Republicans are

terrified of impeachment. Most of them don't want to defend Trump's behavior on the record, but they're even more terrified of Trump's base turning on them if they vote to convict. So you're going to see a lot of posturing. Senators saying, well, I haven't seen the evidence yet, and I'll keep an open mind and all the usual nonsense.

But realistically, most Republicans are going to vote to acquit no matter what, because party loyalty is stronger than everything else these days. The question is whether any Republicans break ranks. In Trump's second impeachment, seven Republican senators voted to convict. That was after January 6th, when the evidence was overwhelming, and there was genuine anger at Trump for inciting the attack on the Capitol.

Could we see something similar this time? Probably not, because those seven senators paid a heavy political price. Some of them retired rather than face Trump-endorsed primary challengers. Others are still dealing with death threats from Trump supporters. So the lesson other Republicans learned was, don't cross Trump. It's not worth it. But here's the thing.

The 2026 midterms are coming. And if public opinion shifts, if independents start seeing Trump as a threat, then the calculation changes, because senators care about re-election more than anything. And if defending Trump costs them their seats, they might actually consider voting to convict. That's what Democrats are betting on. They're hoping that by holding impeachment hearings, by putting all of Trump's worst

behavior on display, by making Republicans vote on the record to protect him, they can shift public opinion enough to win in 2026. Now, let's connect this to the other scandals happening right now. Because impeachment doesn't happen in a vacuum. It's part of a larger narrative that Democrats are building about Trump being corrupt and lawless.

You've got the Epstein files cover-up, with Trump and his attorney general allegedly hiding evidence about powerful people involved in sex trafficking. You've got the Kennedy Center corruption, with Trump's ally Grinnell allegedly giving away millions in public funds to political allies. And now you've got impeachment over political violence. All of these stories feed into each other.

They create a portrait of an administration that believes it's above the law. And that portrait is what Democrats are going to run on in 2026. They're going to say Trump is corrupt, his people are corrupt, and they think they can get away with anything. Vote for us to restore accountability. The impeachment push is the sharpest tool in that arsenal, because if Congress says

this behavior is impeachable, that's a powerful statement. It says this isn't normal. This isn't acceptable. This is a president who needs to be removed. Even if the Senate doesn't convict, even if Trump stays in office, the impeachment itself matters.

It matters because it puts Republicans on the record. It matters because it dominates the news. It matters because it shapes how people think about Trump and his party. Al Green understands this. That's why he's been so relentless. He's not naive enough to think the Senate will actually convict Trump, but he knows

that the process itself is valuable. He knows that forcing votes, holding hearings, making people defend the indefensible, all of that has political power. And the fact that 140 members backed him shows that more Democrats are coming around to that view. They're realizing that playing it safe, trying to avoid controversy, isn't working.

Trump is still doing terrible things. His supporters are still threatening violence. And if Congress doesn't use its constitutional powers to check him, then what's the point of having those powers? So we're heading into this collision course. Green is promising more impeachment articles before Christmas.

Support is growing in the House. The Senate is bracing for impact. And Trump as well. Trump as being Trump. Doubling down on the rhetoric that got him in trouble in the first place. The next few weeks are going to be crucial, because if Green can get a few more members on board, if another scandal breaks that pushes people over the edge, if Trump says something

so outrageous that even moderate Democrats feel like they have to act, then we could actually see articles of impeachment pass the House. And if that happens, all hell breaks loose. The Senate has to hold a trial. 2026, campaign season, becomes all about impeachment. And we're back in the chaos of Trump's first term, where every day is a new crisis

and nothing else can get done. Okay, let's break this down into the core pieces so you really understand what's happening and why it matters. This is about whether Congress still has the power to check the president. Because that's what impeachment is for, right? The founders gave Congress this tool to remove presidents who abuse their power.

But if Congress never actually uses it, or if the Senate always just votes to acquit along party lines, then what's the point? Trump has basically tested every limit of presidential power. He's done things that previous presidents wouldn't have dreamed of, and he's gotten away with almost all of it because Republicans protect him and Democrats are too scared to act decisively.

So the question is, does Congress still matter? Or has the presidency become so powerful that nothing can stop it? Al Green is saying Congress has to reassert itself, has to use impeachment the way it was intended, as a check on executive overreach and abuse. And 140 members agree with him.

That's not a majority yet, but it's getting closer. And here's the thing. If Congress doesn't act now, if they let Trump normalize political violence and abuse of power, then the next president is going to push even further, because they'll know there are no consequences. They'll know Congress is toothless, and that's how democracies die.

Not with a bang, but with a slow erosion of checks and balances, until there's nothing left. The political violence angle is really important, because this isn't some abstract policy disagreement. This is about whether it's okay for a president to encourage threats against lawmakers who oppose him.

Green is dead serious when he talks about Trump, This is about whether it's OK for a president to encourage threats against lawmakers who oppose him.

Green is dead serious when he talks about Trump, normalizing the idea that you can hang members of Congress for their votes. And he's not making it up. Trump's rhetoric has gotten increasingly violent. His supporters have picked up on it. And lawmakers are genuinely afraid for their safety. This should be a bipartisan issue, by the way, because Republicans are threatened, too, especially the ones who've criticized Trump. Liz Cheney needed a security detail.

Adam Kinzinger got death threats. And yeah, Democrats get it worse, but the threat is real across the board. So, when Green says, this is impeachable, he's saying a president can't be allowed to create an environment where his political opponents fear for their lives. That's not democracy. That's authoritarianism.

And if Congress doesn't draw a line here, where do they draw it? The problem is that most Republicans won't acknowledge this. They'll say the threats are isolated incidents, not Trump's fault, just crazy people doing crazy things. But that's nonsense. When the president constantly talks about his opponents being traitors and enemies and

says suggestive things about punishment, he's creating the climate for violence. And he knows it. Point three. The Senate's calculation is fascinating because they're trapped between two terrible options. Hold a real trial and alienate Trump's base, or bury it quickly and look like they're

covering up. Most senators are probably hoping the House never actually passes impeachment, so they don't have to choose. But if it comes to them, they're going to have to pick a side. And that choice could define the 2026 elections. Imagine you're a Republican senator in a swing state—Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Arizona,

Nevada. You've got a close race coming up. If you vote to convict Trump, his base will primary you or just stay home in November. But if you vote to acquit, especially if the evidence is really damning, independents might punish you for enabling him. That's a no-dot-win situation, and it's why Republican senators are probably privately

furious at Al Green for putting them in this position. They don't want to defend Trump's behavior, but they don't have the courage to stand up to him, either. Now, could we see any Republican senators vote to convict this time? Maybe, if public opinion really shifts. If Trump does something so outrageous between now and the trial that it becomes politically

safer to vote against him than for him. But don't count on it. The party is still completely in Trump's grip. Point four. This connects to all the other scandals in a really important way, because Democrats are building a comprehensive case that Trump and his administration are fundamentally corrupt

and lawless. The Epstein files? That's about hiding evidence and protecting powerful elites. The Kennedy Center? That's about using public and protecting powerful elites. The Kennedy Center? That's about using public resources for political gain. The impeachment?

That's about political violence and abuse of power. Each one reinforces the others. And Democrats are smart to make these connections, because voters might not care about any single scandal, but a pattern of corruption is harder to ignore. It's death by a thousand cuts. Each new revelation makes the last one more believable.

So when Al Green talks about impeachment, he's not just talking about one set of articles. He's talking about a president who has shown over and over that he believes he's above the law. And that's the narrative Democrats are pushing for 2026. Now, will it work politically? That's the big question.

Impeachment didn't work in Trump's first term. He actually got more popular during the process, and his party rallied around him. Could the same thing happen again? Maybe. Trump is really good at playing the victim. He's going to say this is a partisan witch hunt.

Democrats are trying to overturn the election. It's all political theater, and his base is going to eat it up. They're going to get more energized, more loyal, more convinced. That the deep state is out to get him. But here's the difference. In Trump's first term, the economy was doing okay, and most people weren't paying close

attention. Now, people are paying attention. They've seen what Trump, too, looks like, and there's a lot more buyer's remorse, especially among independents and even some Republicans. So impeachment might actually cut through this time. It might force people to confront Trump's behavior in a way they didn't before. And if Democrats can keep the focus on his actual misconduct, rather than letting it

become a partisan circus, it could move voters. The key is going to be how the media covers it. If they cover it as Democrats launch another partisan impeachment, then it's dead on arrival with anyone outside the Democratic base. But if they cover it as President accused of normalizing political violence, 140 lawmakers demand accountability, then it has a shot at resonating.

And victims matter, too. If members of Congress who've received death threats come forward and testify about the climate Trump has created, that's powerful. If law enforcement officials talk about the spike in threats tied to Trump's rhetoric, that's evidence people can't ignore. So, Al Green is betting that this time will be different, that the accumulation of scandals,

the escalation of violence, the brazenness of the corruption, that all of it has reached a tipping point where Congress has to act and the public will support it. Is he right? We're about to find out. Because if Green follows through on his promise to file more articles before Christmas, and

if support keeps growing, we could see a House impeachment vote in early 2026, and then all eyes turn to the Senate. Here's my take. The House will probably pass articles of impeachment eventually, maybe not this month, but sometime in the first half of 2026. The pressure is building too fast, and Democrats have too many angry voters demanding action. The Senate will hold a perfunctory trial and vote to acquit along party lines, maybe with

one or two Republican defections at most—not enough to convict, but enough to create some political tension within the party. And then it becomes a campaign issue. Democrats run on, We tried to hold Trump accountable. Republicans protected him. Republicans run on, Democrats wasted time on partisan impeachment instead of fixing

real problems, and voters decide who they believe. My guess is it helps Democrats more than it hurts them. Because impeachment keeps Trump's worst behavior in the news, it forces Republicans to defend the indefensible on the record, and it energizes the Democratic base while giving independents reasons to reconsider their support for Trump. But it's also risky.

Because if impeachment becomes a circus, if Democrats overreach or make it too partisan, it could backfire. Trump could play victim so effectively that he actually gains support. That's what happened last time. So the stakes are high. Al Green is forcing a confrontation that will either break Trump's grip on power or strengthen

it. There's not much middle ground. The bottom line is this. One hundred and forty members of Congress just voted to impeach the president. That's not a small thing. That's a significant portion of the legislative branch saying the executive has gone too far.

And even if it doesn't result in removal, it matters. It matters because it's a statement about standards, about what we will and won't accept from our leaders, about whether Congress is willing to use its constitutional powers or just let them atrophy. Al Green is betting that Congress still has the courage to check presidential power, that lawmakers are willing to risk political backlash to do the right thing, and that voters will ultimately reward accountability over party loyalty. We'll see if he's right.

But one thing's for sure. The next few months are going to be absolutely wild. Impeachment votes, Senate trials, 2026 campaigns, ramping up, all of it happening at once in this pressure cooker of scandals and political violence. So yeah, buckle up, because American democracy is about to stress-test itself in real time, and we're all going to find out if the system still works or if it's already too broken to save itself. All right, if you made it this far, smash that subscribe button, because this impeachment

fight is just getting started. We're going to be covering every twist and turn. We're going to be covering every twist and turn. See you in the next one.