• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What Will Mitch & Lindsey Do?

Robertinfremont said:
His oath says he must be impartial but the Democrats do not? This entire session in the House was based on lies. Told daily by Democrats and now they expect the lies to be acceptable to the Senate.
Click to expand...

It's a special oath, for the impeachment, that would only ever apply to senators. It's in the Senate rules that the GOP has had ample time to change, if they wanted.

What possible pleasure can you take in just reeling off misinformation with such confidence?

I'd need to be paid a LOT to do that, and I'd still hate myself.
 
Robertinfremont said:
No and the Senate needs not be asked to either.
Click to expand...

There's a long established procedure for the Senate trial and administration of this oath is required. I do agree that oaths without a risk of perjury are meaningless and it wouldn't surprise me at all if Moscow Mitch dispensed with the oath since he and other Republicans have already told us they have no intention of following it anyway. That, in fact, would indicate some sense of honesty from Republicans so I'm certain that won't happen.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Wrong analogy. Once the trial starts, all other business stops. The Senate should not accept a situation where the House just keeps dumping stuff on them.
Click to expand...

All business in the Senate, yes. The House can do whatever it wants and if Republicans don't like it they can stuff it.
 
Athanasius68 said:
If anyone ought to recuse themselves, ought be the Senators running for presdient.
Talk about a conflict of interest.
Click to expand...

Anyone who said they already have a determined outcome should be recused, on any side, period.
 
swing_voter said:
Why recluse? It's a 100% partisan. Dems vote impeach, reps vote no.

It's not legit. It's a circus. It's a waste of time and taxpayer dollars.
Click to expand...

/Thread
 
Robertinfremont said:
His oath says he must be impartial but the Democrats do not? This entire session in the House was based on lies. Told daily by Democrats and now they expect the lies to be acceptable to the Senate.
Click to expand...

not sure what you were talking about. What lies?
 
RetiredUSN said:
I think I have earned the right to vote or not vote.

Who the **** are you to determine?
Click to expand...

True, there's always a right to sit back and be a spectator in the democratic process. Just pointing out how someone who presents himself as a great patriot can sit on the sidelines and, what, think that doing the work of a citizen is, what, beneath him? Too hard? Nobody's good enough for his vote?
 
Athanasius68 said:
The Vice president doesn't preside over an impeachment trial of the president as it would be unseemly.
The Democrats who are running for president are in kind of the same boat. They seek to replace Trump with themselves. Do they stand better chance now or in November? What's their motivation in voting the way they will during the trial?
Click to expand...

Apparently James Madison and all the signers of the Constitution disagree with you. But I'm sure that won't stop you from making up ****.
 
digitusmedius said:
All business in the Senate, yes. The House can do whatever it wants and if Republicans don't like it they can stuff it.
Click to expand...

And the Senate can do what it wishes ie-- send it back until the House is ready to proceed.
 
WillyPete said:
Your original claim was that there wasn't any expectation or oath of impartiality.

Maybe leave the tailgate down to save time when next you need to move goalposts.

I imagine it seems quaint to someone whose words means nothing to them, but violating an oath is pretty serious, though obviously it can be difficult to prove. It's the hook they hang all perjury charges on, for example.

In this case the GOP helpfully, loudly, publicly declared themselves as 100% in the tank for Trump. It's completely incompatible with the oath.

Fairly minor issue overall, but you were dead wrong, and a fool, and I felt compelled to try to help you (goodness knows why.)
Click to expand...

The Constitution makes no requirement of impartiality nor would it make sense for them to expect politicians to hold no political bias. Plus, the oath was just taken today, so if you see any lack of impartiality from this point forward, let me know.
 
digitusmedius said:
Apparently James Madison and all the signers of the Constitution disagree with you. But I'm sure that won't stop you from making up ****.
Click to expand...

Making what up?
The Chief Justice presides over an impeachment of a president.
And that is do to its basic conflict of interest.
Do not the Democrats in the Senate running for president also have a conflict of interest?
 
digitusmedius said:
True, there's always a right to sit back and be a spectator in the democratic process. Just pointing out how someone who presents himself as a great patriot can sit on the sidelines and, what, think that doing the work of a citizen is, what, beneath him? Too hard? Nobody's good enough for his vote?
Click to expand...

Me? When did I ever represent myself a great patriot? That is the most diluted term in politics. I participated in the democratic process last election on the state and local level. I guess you are the one making the rules on terms of patriotism now?

How phony can you be?
 
Obscurity said:
Will they take the oath and as such denigrate and soil their positions? Will they recuse?
Click to expand...

They will wipe their ass with the bible they place their hand upon if it means protecting Trump and the party.

Is there any doubt?
 
digitusmedius said:
Oh, that old tactic of crying foul for just seeing your case get demolished. SOP for rightwing commenters. So lazy and cowardly.
Click to expand...

He didnt 'demolish my case.' He didnt address my point at all. But Im not surprised that your hatred and anger kept you from seeing that either.
 
Fletch said:
He didnt 'demolish my case.' He didnt address my point at all. But Im not surprised that your hatred and anger kept you from seeing that either.
Click to expand...

Oh, get off it and quit playing a victim.
 
Fletch said:
Obviously this was on CNN within the last half hour because you are all repeating the same talking points. Maybe if the senate had been sequestered for the last 6 months you might have something. The problem is, they have already heard the evidence. Plus, if you want impartiality, you would have to demand that Warren and Sanders remove themselves since they have a huge conflict of interest and have already made their postitions on impeachment well known. It seems to me that impartiality in your mind is agreeing with liberals.
Click to expand...
Senators were forbidden by Donald Trump's Attorney General to see any of the documents which the House requested. This forms part of the impeachment crime of obstructing justice.
 
Fletch said:
The Constitution makes no requirement of impartiality nor would it make sense for them to expect politicians to hold no political bias. Plus, the oath was just taken today, so if you see any lack of impartiality from this point forward, let me know.
Click to expand...

So personal oaths based in the rules governing Congress (itself beholden to the Constitution) are trumped by the Constitution.

Got it!

It should be funny to see reporters asking about that, and see them walk it back, now that it's a bad look. I half expect them to wink at the camera, to reassure the base.

Also, if you can't abide by an oath, you shouldn't take it in the first place. That's the reasonable expectation.
 
RetiredUSN said:
Me? When did I ever represent myself a great patriot? That is the most diluted term in politics. I participated in the democratic process last election on the state and local level. I guess you are the one making the rules on terms of patriotism now?

How phony can you be?
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree about how meaningless declarations or demonstrations of patriotism are. I probably should have stayed with the concept of citizenship. It would have been less threatening to you (I think but it looks like you're kinda touchy). When I read that you'd like to see Trump defeated and then you tell me you're going to just be a spectator in that election that speaks of someone just not wanting to do the basic work of citizenship. Staying on the sidelines because we might have to vote for someone who's not one's perfect choice to avoid putting someone in who's horrible is one of those tough decisions a citizen has to make. I didn't get to vote for my preferred presidential candidate in 2016 but I sure as hell knew who shouldn't be in that job and we now have that documented to our great detriment.
 
No. it cannot. There is no provision for anything even remotely for doing that. Why do you "patriots" not know a thing about our Constitution?
 
digitusmedius said:
Oh, get off it and quit playing a victim.
Click to expand...

?? Im not playing a victim. Perhaps you should look up what 'playing the victim' means because you are using it incorrectly and stupidly. Just so you know, me saying he didnt address my point is not me being victimized. Go educate yourself and come back when you know something.
 
WillyPete said:
So personal oaths based in the rules governing Congress (itself beholden to the Constitution) are trumped by the Constitution.

Got it!

It should be funny to see reporters asking about that, and see them walk it back, now that it's a bad look. I half expect them to wink at the camera, to reassure the base.

Also, if you can't abide by an oath, you shouldn't take it in the first place. That's the reasonable expectation.
Click to expand...

Its not my fault you are naive enough to believe more than 5 out of 100 will be impartial. And 5 is being generous. They will all sign it, they will all pretend to be objective to fool people like you, they will vote along party lines, then you will come here and declare that republicans were partisan. There is one certainty about this trial--anything short of removing the president and the left will cry cover-up. This is all political gamesmanship for 2020. You want to pretend its not, have at it.
 
Jean-s said:
Senators were forbidden by Donald Trump's Attorney General to see any of the documents which the House requested. This forms part of the impeachment crime of obstructing justice.
Click to expand...

Which documents in particular are you referring to?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom