← Back to scans

Will the President be impeached before Jan 20, 2029?

KXIMPEACH-29-JAN20 · Politics · 2026-04-07
50%
Agent
68%
Market Price
-18.0%
Edge
40%
Confidence
Final Rationale
My corrected estimate of ~44% accounts for two election cycles giving Democrats ~72% chance of holding the House at some point, a ~63% conditional probability of impeachment inquiry given the 2/2 Trump-specific base rate and 140 existing supporters, and ~88% probability of articles passing given inquiry. The Devil's Advocate correctly identified that I overweighted minority-party leadership resistance (Pelosi reversed in 2019) and undercounted election cycles. The market at 68% has an anomalous $0.46 bid-ask spread suggesting unreliable price discovery, and the related removal market at 26% cross-checks against impeachment being as high as 68%. I pull slightly toward the market to 50% to account for Trump-specific escalation risks over 1019 remaining days that my static analysis may underweight.
Price vs. prediction
How the market moved after the agent's call. Solid blue line is the actual market price; dashed line is the agent's static forecast at $t{=}0$.
$n = 53$ follow-ups
1. Planner Opus · Fermi decomposition + tool plan
Tools chosen: kalshi_data kalshi_orderbook article_search web_search wikipedia_lookup code_execution
Sub-questions (Fermi decomposition)
  1. Will the House of Representatives vote to initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump before Jan 20, 2029? (w=0.35)
  2. If a formal impeachment inquiry is initiated, will the House pass articles of impeachment against President Trump before Jan 20, 2029? (w=0.40)
  3. Will Democrats gain a House majority before Jan 20, 2029 (enabling impeachment proceedings)? (w=0.25)
Planner reasoning
This question asks about Trump's potential third impeachment during his second term (2025-2029). The key causal mechanism is that impeachment requires House majority vote, and Republicans currently control the House. The critical pivot point is the 2026 midterm elections — historically, the president's party loses House seats ~80% of midterms, giving Democrats a plausible path to a majority. However, even if Democrats gain the House, they must have sufficient motivation and a politically viable case to actually impeach. Reference class: 4 total impeachments in US history, 3 in last 30 years (all in divided government). Trump's unusually high prior impeachment frequency (2x already) increases the conditional probability if Democrats gain power. The 'no majority needed' edge case (Republicans turning on Trump) is near-zero probability. The combination logic is conditional: P(impeach) = P(Dems get House) × P(impeach | Dem House) + P(Reps keep House) × P(impeach | Rep House). The question resolves YES on impeachment (House vote), NOT Senate conviction.
2. Research Parallel tool calls · legacy v2
ToolStatusTimeItemsSummary
kalshi_data OK 2.0s -
kalshi_orderbook OK 0.1s -
article_search OK 0.2s -
web_search OK 57.1s -
wikipedia_lookup OK 1.9s -
code_execution OK 0.0s -
3. Evidence Synthesis Sonnet · 16 items · legacy v2
#StrengthCredibilityDirectionSourceClaimPriced In
1 STRONG - ↓ DOWN web_search Rep. Al Green forced two House impeachment votes in 2025 — both were tabled. In June 2025, 128 Democrats voted with Republicans to block charges; in December 2025, 140 members voted to advance but leadership voted 'present' and it was again tabled. Yes
2 STRONG - ↓ DOWN web_search Democratic leadership (Hakeem Jeffries, Pete Aguilar) has explicitly discouraged impeachment talk, calling it a 'distraction' and stating 'Literally no Democrats are talking about this.' Yes
3 MODERATE - ↑ UP web_search April 2026 polling shows 52% of likely voters support impeaching Trump a third time, which a pollster called 'an unprecedented result this early in a presidential term.' No
4 MODERATE - ↑ UP web_search Trump himself warned at a January 6, 2026 House Republican retreat that Democrats will impeach him if Republicans lose the midterms, signaling he views it as likely under divided government. Yes
5 MODERATE - ↑ UP kalshi_data The Kalshi market KXIMPEACH-29-JAN20 is priced at 68%, with a 7-day gain of +3% and a 30-day gain of +1%, within a historical range of 46–70%. Yes
6 WEAK - NEUTRAL kalshi_orderbook The orderbook shows high liquidity (depth 37,761) but a very wide bid-ask spread ($0.49 yes bid vs $0.05 no bid, spread of $0.46), suggesting significant market maker uncertainty or data anomaly. Yes
7 STRONG - NEUTRAL web_search The December 2025 impeachment support in the House grew 77% from June 2025 (from ~79 to 140 members), but Republicans still hold the majority and blocked the vote. Yes
8 MODERATE - ↓ DOWN web_search Democratic moderates prefer focusing on pocketbook issues rather than impeachment, and even progressives acknowledge little is gained from a process 'destined to fail in the Senate.' Yes
9 STRONG - ↑ UP wikipedia_lookup Historical precedent shows that when Democrats held the House majority during Trump's first term, they impeached him twice (2019 and 2021), demonstrating high conditional probability of impeachment given Democratic House control and Trump presidency. Yes
10 MODERATE - NEUTRAL kalshi_data The KXTRUMPREMOVE market (impeachment AND removal) is priced at 26%, up +5% in 7 days, implying the market assigns meaningful but minority probability to full removal. Yes
11 MODERATE - ↑ UP web_search Rep. Thanedar filed 7 articles of impeachment in May 2025 (obstruction, bribery, corruption), showing Democratic members are willing to identify substantive grounds for impeachment. Yes
12 WEAK - NEUTRAL code_execution A base rate calculation estimates ~26% unconditional probability of impeachment, drawing on the 3 presidential impeachments in the last 30 years, all under divided government. Yes
13 MODERATE - ↑ UP web_search Historical pattern: the president's party loses House seats in ~80% of midterm elections, giving Democrats a plausible path to regaining the House in November 2026. Yes
14 MODERATE - ↑ UP web_search Trump's approval and Republican electoral standing is under pressure based on polling (52% pro-impeachment), which historically correlates with midterm seat losses for the president's party. No
15 WEAK - NEUTRAL kalshi_data No specific Kalshi market for 2026 House majority control was retrieved; the impeachment market at 68% implicitly prices in the Democratic majority pathway. Yes
16 WEAK - NEUTRAL wikipedia_lookup The 2026 Maine Senate race features incumbent Susan Collins running for re-election; this is a competitive race but not directly informative about House majority probabilities. Yes
Information Gaps
  • No dedicated Kalshi or Polymarket data specifically on '2026 Democrats win House majority' probability
  • No generic election forecasting model output (e.g., 538, Sabato, Cook Political Report) for 2026 House generic ballot or seat projections
  • No data on current House seat margins or how many seats Democrats need to flip in 2026
  • No information on specific Trump actions post-April 2026 that could constitute impeachable conduct
  • No data on whether any formal impeachment inquiry has been introduced in early 2026 (as opposed to standalone articles)
  • Unclear whether the 52% pro-impeachment polling is from a credible pollster or partisan source
  • No data on Trump approval ratings or generic congressional ballot in early 2026
  • Missing context on whether special elections between now and November 2026 could shift House control
Key Uncertainties
  • Whether Democrats will actually gain a House majority in November 2026 — the pivotal gating condition
  • Whether Democratic leadership would pursue impeachment even if they gain the majority, given their stated reluctance and concerns about political distraction
  • Whether a sufficiently galvanizing Trump action occurs before Jan 20, 2029 that shifts Democratic leadership calculation toward impeachment
  • The wide Kalshi orderbook spread ($0.49 yes bid vs $0.05 no bid) may indicate a data anomaly — the 68% market price deserves scrutiny for reliability
  • Whether the 'inquiry' threshold (sq1) vs full articles vote (sq2) distinction matters — historically in Trump's cases, inquiry and vote have been relatively close in time
  • The small chance (~near-zero) that enough Republicans turn on Trump to enable impeachment without Democratic majority
Market Context
Price: 0.68 · 7d: +0.03 · 30d: +0.01
Volume: MODERATE — 672 avg daily contracts for primary market; KXTRUMPREMOVE higher at 1305 · Depth: HIGH depth (37,761) but ANOMALOUS spread ($0.46 between yes_bid=$0.49 and no_bid=$0.05) — suggests possible data error or unusual market structure
Reliability: LOW-MEDIUM — The 68% price seems high relative to the conditional logic (requires Dem majority + willingness to impeach), and the orderbook data appears anomalous. The related KXTRUMPREMOVE at 26% provides a useful cross-check. The wide spread and anomalous orderbook reduce confidence in the 68% figure as a clean probability signal.
4. Independent Forecaster Opus · No market price · legacy v2 Did NOT see market price
Independent estimate: 32% (45% confidence)
sq1: Will the House of Representatives vote to initiate a formal impeachment inquiry against President Trump before Jan 20, 2029?
35%
Base rate: conditional on Dem House (~55% chance of inquiry given precedent of 2/2 Trump impeachments, offset by current leadership resistance). Combined: 0.62×0.55 + 0.38×0.01 ≈ 0.345. Leadership discouragement pushes down, but growing caucus support (140 members) and 52% public support push up modestly.
sq2: If a formal impeachment inquiry is initiated, will the House pass articles of impeachment against President Trump before Jan 20, 2029?
88%
Historical conditional probability is near 100% — every inquiry has led to articles. Slight discount for possibility inquiry stalls or moderates defect in sufficient numbers. But if leadership commits to inquiry, articles are very likely.
sq3: Will Democrats gain a House majority before Jan 20, 2029?
62%
80% base rate of president's party losing midterm seats, slim Republican majority, two election cycles (2026, 2028). 52% pro-impeachment polling suggests unfavorable environment for Republicans. Slight discount for structural GOP advantages.
Show full reasoning trace
base rate: 3 presidential impeachments in 30 years, all under divided government. Trump specifically has been impeached 2/2 times Democrats held the House during his presidency. Naive base rate ~26%, but Trump-specific rate is higher conditional on Dem House.
evidence updates: Democratic leadership resistance pushes down significantly (-10% from what would otherwise be higher). Growing caucus support (79→140 members) and 52% public support push up modestly (+5%). No specific galvanizing event yet identified for 2026-2029 period.
combination method: Conditional chain: P(Dem House) × P(inquiry | Dem House) × P(articles | inquiry) + small term for Rep House path and direct-to-articles path.
final: The critical bottleneck is twofold: (1) Democrats must win the House (62%), and (2) leadership must overcome its stated reluctance to pursue impeachment (~55% conditional). The articles-passing-given-inquiry step is high probability (88%). Combined estimate: 32%.
5. Devil's Advocate Sonnet · legacy v2 Market price revealed
Reasoning Flaw Math Error Asymmetric Evidence
Challenges
  1. The forecaster's P(inquiry | Dem House) of 55% seems too low given the Trump-specific base rate. Democrats impeached Trump 2/2 times they held the House. The 'leadership resistance' discount is based on statements made while Democrats are in the MINORITY — Jeffries/Aguilar are discouraging impeachment talk now because they literally cannot impeach. Once in the majority, the political calculus changes completely. The 140 members already supporting impeachment while in the minority is a strong signal that majority status would rapidly shift dynamics.
  2. The forecaster assigns 62% to Dems winning the House but doesn't adequately account for TWO election cycles (2026 AND 2028). Even if P(Dem House in 2026) = 55%, the probability of Dems holding the House at SOME POINT before Jan 2029 includes 2028 as well. If P(Dem House 2026) = 55% and P(Dem House 2028 | not in 2026) = ~40%, then P(Dem House at some point) ≈ 55% + 0.45×0.40 = 73%. This is materially higher than 62%.
  3. The conditional chain math doesn't fully check out. Using the forecaster's own numbers: 0.62 × 0.55 × 0.88 = 0.300, plus 'small term for Rep House path' gets to 0.32. But if we correct P(Dem House at some point) to ~73% and P(inquiry | Dem House) to ~65% (given historical precedent and growing momentum), we get 0.73 × 0.65 × 0.88 = 0.418, which is substantially higher.
  4. The forecaster heavily weights 'leadership resistance' as a STRONG DOWN factor, but this evidence is from statements made in 2025 when Democrats are in the minority. These are strategic positioning statements, not binding commitments. Historical precedent shows Pelosi also initially resisted impeachment in 2019 before reversing course within months. This factor should be weighted much less heavily.
  5. The 52% public support for impeachment is described as MODERATE UP, but this is actually quite significant — it's higher than public support was for either of Trump's first two impeachments at the time articles were filed. This should be weighted more heavily as an enabling condition.
  6. The forecaster notes 140 House Democrats supporting impeachment (up from 79), representing roughly 65% of the Democratic caucus. If Democrats win the House with ~220+ seats, 140 supporters already constitutes a majority of the full House (218 needed). This near-existing majority for impeachment articles is underweighted.
  7. The information gap about 'specific Trump actions that could constitute impeachable conduct' implicitly assumes new conduct is needed. But multiple articles have already been filed based on existing conduct, and 1019 days remain — a very long time for additional provocations or escalations.
Suggested adjustment: +15pp
Three key reasoning flaws justify upward adjustment: (1) P(Dem House at some point before 2029) should be ~73% not 62% given two election cycles; (2) P(inquiry | Dem House) should be higher (~65%) given 2/2 historical precedent and that current leadership resistance reflects minority-party positioning, not majority-party commitments; (3) The 140-member support base already approaching House majority threshold is underweighted. Corrected chain: ~0.73 × 0.65 × 0.88 ≈ 0.42, plus small Republican-House-path term ≈ 0.44-0.47.
Market comparison: Forecaster: 32%, Market: 68%. The 36-point divergence is large. While the anomalous orderbook spread reduces confidence in the exact market price, the forecaster's estimate has genuine reasoning flaws (undercounting election cycles, over-weighting current minority-party leadership statements, underweighting the existing 140-member support base). Correcting these flaws moves the estimate to ~45-47%, which narrows but doesn't close the gap. The remaining divergence (~20 points) may reflect the market pricing in Trump-specific escalation risks over 1019 remaining days that the forecaster's static analysis doesn't capture.
6. Aggregator Opus · final calibrated forecast
50% (40% confidence)
My corrected estimate of ~44% accounts for two election cycles giving Democrats ~72% chance of holding the House at some point, a ~63% conditional probability of impeachment inquiry given the 2/2 Trump-specific base rate and 140 existing supporters, and ~88% probability of articles passing given inquiry. The Devil's Advocate correctly identified that I overweighted minority-party leadership resistance (Pelosi reversed in 2019) and undercounted election cycles. The market at 68% has an anomalous $0.46 bid-ask spread suggesting unreliable price discovery, and the related removal market at 26% cross-checks against impeachment being as high as 68%. I pull slightly toward the market to 50% to account for Trump-specific escalation risks over 1019 remaining days that my static analysis may underweight.
7. Entry Decision Opus Trader
Side
NO
Position Size
$800
Contracts
2500
Trader Confidence
40%
Trade Rationale
The forecast estimates 50% probability vs. the market's 68%, giving an 18% edge on the NO side. The sub-question decomposition is compelling: Democrats winning the House is only 62%, and even conditional on that, initiating a formal inquiry is far from certain (35% unconditional). The related removal market at 26% cross-checks poorly against 68% impeachment — impeachment without removal has happened twice with Trump, but 68% still seems inflated. The $0.46 bid-ask spread noted in the rationale suggests unreliable price discovery, which means the 68% price may not reflect true market consensus. However, forecaster confidence is low at 0.40, the Devil's Advocate flagged reasoning flaws and suggested adjusting upward, and we already hold a correlated position (Trump impeached AND removed — NO). The 1019-day horizon adds substantial uncertainty.
Allocation Logic
Edge is large (18%) but forecaster confidence is low (0.40) and we have a correlated Trump impeachment/removal position. Sizing below baseline at $800 to account for the low confidence, long time horizon, and portfolio correlation.
Entry price: $0.32
Current: $0.40
Status: OPEN
P&L: $200.00