MSNBC Segment on ‘How Impeachment Works’ Gets Process Wrong

Newsbusters.org ^ | August 22, 2018 | Kyle Drennen

[Kaslin]

In his haste to outline the impeachment process for liberal viewers hoping to see President Trump removed from office, on Wednesday, MSNBC anchor Ali Velshi got a couple key facts wrong. Later in the 11:00 a.m. ET hour show, Velshi corrected his mistakes after being alerted to them by members of the audience via social media.

As he reported that the “president’s campaign manager...was found guilty in an Alexandria, Virginia, courtroom within minutes of the president’s personal lawyer pleading guilty in a New York City courtroom, implicating the president in his crimes,” Velshi walked over to a touchscreen monitor in the studio displaying the headline, “How Impeachment Works.”

MSNBC Segment on ‘How Impeachment Works’ Gets Process Wrong

Aided by on-screen graphics, the host began to summarize the congressional process: “First of all, the House of Representatives draws up articles of impeachment. Think of the House as the prosecutor, the document details any, quote, ‘High crimes and misdemeanors that the president is believed to be guilty of.’”

He then falsely explained:

Next, the House votes. At least two-thirds of the chamber has to approve the impeachment. Two hundred and eighty-eight votes, as it’s currently constituted, since there are four vacancies in the House right now. This is a high bar, making many impeachment proceedings a bipartisan effort, neither party can do it on their own.

In reality, only a simple majority is required in the House for an impeachment vote.

Velshi made another blunder as he outlined the next step:

Once the House approves the articles of impeachment, the matter goes to the Senate, which acts more like a courtroom. The Senate tries the case and votes, acting as defense, judge, and jury. Again, the threshold is two-thirds. So even half the chamber voting to impeach would still acquit the president. Two-thirds of the Senate, 60 as it stands right now, are needed to vote guilty for impeachment.

While the Senate does require a two-thirds majority vote on impeachment, that number would be 67, not 60. Immediately following his error-laden explanation, Velshi engaged in a discussion with presidential historian Jon Meacham and National Constitution Center president Jeffrey Rosen, neither of whom pointed out his inaccurate reporting.

Only after being informed by viewers on social media during the following commercial break about getting the impeachment process wrong did Velshi correct the record:

Welcome back. Some days we love social media because a number of you sent me information about something I made a mistake on in the last segment. So I want to correct that real quick. To impeach the president, the House needs only a simple majority, not two-thirds. The House needs a simple majority. The Senate does need a two-thirds majority, but that would be 67 of the senators, 66 of the senators or 67, someone will help you with the math on that, but the fact is, its two-thirds of 100 senators, depending on how many seats in the Senate are actually filled at any given time. So thank you to those of you who sent that information.

Velshi could have double checked the widely-available information with any number of sources. In May of 2017, The New York Times explained the impeachment process in a lengthy article, already eagerly anticipating the end of the Trump presidency only a few months after he took the oath of office.  

Here is a full transcript of Velshi’s initial August 22 explanation segment:

11:02 AM ET

(...)

ALI VELSHI: The president’s campaign manager – let's walk over here with me – was found guilty in an Alexandria, Virginia, courtroom within minutes of the president’s personal lawyer pleading guilty in a New York City courtroom, implicating the president in his crimes. All of it bringing impeachment back to the forefront. Let’s take a look at the process of impeachment.

[ON-SCREEN HEADLINE: How Impeachment Works]

First of all, the House of Representatives – okay, let’s do that, let’s open that up [struggling with touchscreen monitor]. There we go, alright. First of all, the House of Representatives draws up articles of impeachment. Think of the House as the prosecutor, the document details any, quote, “High crimes and misdemeanors that the president is believed to be guilty of.” Only the House can bring charges against a president, but any individual congressperson can start this process.

Next, the House votes. At least two-thirds of the chamber has to approve the impeachment. Two hundred and eighty-eight votes, as it’s currently constituted, since there are four vacancies in the House right now. This is a high bar, making many impeachment proceedings a bipartisan effort, neither party can do it on their own.

Once the House approves the articles of impeachment, the matter goes to the Senate, which acts more like a courtroom. The Senate tries the case and votes, acting as defense, judge, and jury. Again, the threshold is two-thirds. So even half the chamber voting to impeach would still acquit the president. Two-thirds of the Senate, 60 as it stands right now, are needed to vote guilty for impeachment.

Now if they do, the president is removed from office, the vice president would then take his place. We have never gotten to this step before, with the Senate acquitting Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton. Richard Nixon resigned before impeachment proceedings could begin. Had he not done that, he would have been impeached.

Joining me now, presidential historian Jon Meacham and president of the National Constitution Center Jeffrey Rosen.

[fwdude]

Democrats think that impeachment is like a piece of legislation.

[OttawaFreeper]

Well, that’s par for the course for the media. They will demand things like gun control or impeachment but have very little or no real understanding of the core material involved.

[butlerweave]

Should have used Obama as an example ,he did a ton of impeachable things ,LOL

[ZULU]

Will they do a sequel on how a civil war reinstates a falsely impeached president and hangs all the conspirators responsible at every level?
I think the latter is more likely than the former.

[a fool in paradise]

Oh, a Canadian from Qatar state run Al-Jazeera is gonna ‘splain it. FUNBC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ali_Velshi

[Pikachu_Dad]

There is far too much irresponsible impeachment talk.

After all, How many Presidents have been impeached to-date...

[timestax]

[Conserv]

He always a putz

[umgud]

Impeachment is easy. If there is a dem majority of at least one seat in the house, then they can impeach for any reason they wish or do it just because they have a majority.

[a fool in paradise]

Their silent coup is full blow coup coup now.

[butlerweave]

Lanny gave them the impeachment ball they dropped it ,LOL

[faithhopecharity]

the communistic mass media propaganda outfits think they can create a huge tissue of lies... to repeal our election and bring down the government we voted for

however, it is so pathetic! i have read and re-read the latest articles, charges several times...
so far all I can see evidence of is...
1. a malicious prosecution utilizing police-state threats and coercive measure to force “confessions” from its targeted Americans, even when those confessions are to events or actions which were, are NOT criminal
2. a desperate but assiduous effort to condemn President Trump through ad hominem bullsheit and ‘guilt by association’
3. investigators, so-called, that desecrate American justice
4. and yes, an attorney who “caved” under pressure to violate, break his duty to maintain his client’s confidences..... while “admitting” doing things (such as paying off an extortionist) that were not illegal for him to do (and certainly not any crime of Donald Trump’s)... and not even campaign-law activities, so far as I can fathom.

so far it seems to be the old “pile up the lies, bullsheit higher and higher....as far as you can get away with...
and just hope that the American public gets confused by hearing and reading it all the time (Gobbels would be proud of today’s leftist American mass media!)

[SaveFerris]

[Sarah Barracuda]

MSNBC should have a segment called “How stupid looks” and just hold up a mirror

[ZULU]

They have no idea what they are dealing with.

[Sarah Barracuda]

Hey it would have been totally racist to impeach Obama, he was the messiah don’t ya know/sarc

[morphing libertarian]

impeachment doesn’t work. Evidence Clinton. Sheets Byrd said he wouldn’t vote to remove the president even though the articles of impeachment consisted of high crimes and misdemeanors.

Obama used the IRS to win an election. No articles of impeachment.

[McGavin999]

Wow, dumb as a stump. Have these people ever attended a civics class?

[lapsus calami]

 

 

After scoping out the evening network propaganda news, all the above is apparently going to be used to ratchet up the drumbeat for Trump to sit down with Mueller. Looks like where this is all now headed.