• 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!

Will the Senate impeachment be fair, honest and impartial?

Will the Senate conduct a fair, honest and impartial impeachment?

  • Total voters
    37
Excast said:
Give the accusations against Trump, the numerous witnesses that spoke to the situation during the events, and his complete unwillingness to provide any documents to explain the truth of what transpired, there was no logical course of action other than impeachment. Failure to do so would be telling Trump it's fair game to bribe foreign countries with American taxpayer dollars in order to help his election chances.
Click to expand...

But but but you guys claim you already have overwhelming evidence.
 
Mr Person said:
But Trumpists are 40-44% of the country. That's the issue. This hatred won't be broken by anything. There is a false sense of victimization, as if you and I are conspiring to hurt them......when mainly we support the safety net programs that so many of them need. And if we both differ on that, we agree on sanity.

Facts are out the window. We've been fighting about the color of the sky for years now (it all blew up when Obama looked likely to win - that kenyan muslim who wanted to destroy America and was racist against white people, if you take it from them)



Either we have a permanent split, they die out, and sensibility springs up OR an awakening. I suspect the former. But I'm increasingly worried we might not stumble there in time. I suspect that once things are sane, we'll wake up to a world with China dominant, allied with Russia/NK/satellites....

...and I don't want that. I'm not quite the typical leftist. I don't mind big military spending as long as it's genuinely serving geopolitical rather than donor goals. I like us being the big dog, and I get the spread required. Trump is pissing it all away, on every front, while ramping up spending.

And there's no opportunity for rational debate, or at least little. Because the "reasonable conservatives" we can go back and forth with on DP..... they'll still vote for the R. Because **** the D, that's why. So what are we aiming for? The youth?

I suppose that's the real hope.
Click to expand...

There are no bigger victims than those on the left.
 
Rising Sun said:
If you read the Constitution you'd know the House doesn't impeach. I know American politics are a bit complicated. Easier in Russia where Putin rules all, eh?
Click to expand...

LOL. I could have sworn I saw the House vote on it, even passing around souvenir pens.
 
Rising Sun said:
1. The Democrats aren't running the Senate.

2. Disagreed. Plenty of evidence was presented during the House inquiry by Trump's own people even though Trump himself ordered a cover-up.
Click to expand...

Translation:

1. Yes, the House was unfair, dishonest, and partial

2. we don't need more evidence because we have more than enough already.
 
Moderate Right said:
Translation:

1. Yes, the House was unfair, dishonest, and partial

2. we don't need more evidence because we have more than enough already.
Click to expand...

Why would any trial EVER ignore some of the evidence???
 
Drawdown said:
Fair is limiting the house to the evidence they used to impeach him
Click to expand...

Exactly. If it was enough evidence to impeach him then you already have enough evidence. If it isn't enough evidence to remove him from office then the House should have gathered more evidence before impeaching.
 
Rising Sun said:
The House doesn't try the impeachment of the President, the Senate does.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhhh. Now I understand. So, when you have a Democratic House you vote to impeach with no evidence and then you expect a 2/3's vote in the Republican Senate to remove Trump from office.
 
Moderate Right said:
Exactly. If it was enough evidence to impeach him then you already have enough evidence. If it isn't enough evidence to remove him from office then the House should have gathered more evidence before impeaching.
Click to expand...

Limit the evidence???? Holy cow


You dont want to see all the evidence!!!!
 
Rising Sun said:
Correct. If the House wrongfully impeached a President, then the Senate will not remove the President. OTOH, if the House did a terrific job but the Senate is beholding and coordinating with the President, the Senate still will not remove the President. That's what we'll see here.
Click to expand...

You started out so well and then drank some kool aid before your last sentence. No matter what spin you want to put on it, the House did their job according to the constitution and the Senate will do theirs.
 
Excast said:
What happened in the House was an investigation that was stonewalled by the administration from top to bottom. Pretty much every witness or piece of information that came out indicated exactly what Trump is accused of, abusing his power by attempting to bribe a foreign government with American taxpayer dollars in order to force them to announce a made up investigation into his political rival.

I don't expect Trump supporters, who long ago either forgot the different between right and wrong or stopped caring, to suddenly change their ways.
Click to expand...

Well, you guys claim there is more than enough evidence from the House hearings so let's see if you are right on that.
 
Excast said:
What happened in the House was an investigation that was stonewalled by the administration from top to bottom. Pretty much every witness or piece of information that came out indicated exactly what Trump is accused of, abusing his power by attempting to bribe a foreign government with American taxpayer dollars in order to force them to announce a made up investigation into his political rival.

I don't expect Trump supporters, who long ago either forgot the different between right and wrong or stopped caring, to suddenly change their ways.
Click to expand...

The die hard trumpers do not want to see all the evidence
 
Drawdown said:
Fair is limiting the house to the evidence they used to impeach him
Click to expand...

Ok Trump ordered witnesses not to testify, therefore he is guilty of obstruction.
 
Rising Sun said:
Disagreed. Do you agree Trump withheld testimony and evidence? What is your opinion of the testimony that was presented, specifically Sondland and Hill? Are they liars in your opinion?

Key Moments From Sondland, Cooper and Hale Testimony - The New York Times
Click to expand...

Trump is within his rights to claim executive privilege. If Democrats disagree with this they can take the issues to court. They refused to take the issues to court because they either believed they would lose in court or they didn't want to take the time to do it, thereby not giving Trump due process. Just because the election is coming up soon is not justification for not giving Trump due process. The founders set an extremely high bar to remove a sitting president from office, such a high bar that even a partisan Senate would want the president removed. They also set presidential elections every four years just so that voters would really be the only ones who could remove a sitting president from office.

All of the witnesses in the House hearings testified that they never saw Trump commit bribery and every single one of them could only offer up their opinions and perceptions of events, with the huge majority of them only testifying to hearsay. Look, it is YOU GUYS who claim there is more than enough evidence from the House hearings to remove Trump from office and you get all bent out of shape when you are denied new witnesses. The very fact you are so upset about not having any new evidence is an acknowledgement that you realize that you don't have enough evidence from the House hearings to remove Trump from office.
 
daeler said:
Ok Trump ordered witnesses not to testify, therefore he is guilty of obstruction.
Click to expand...

Invoking a legally recognized power is not obstruction. It was his right. The democrats elected not to litigate the extent of that right. That was their mistake. It was litigating the recordings that brought down Nixon. Masturbating over the process to get it in before the 2020 election was a DNC decision. They will now suffer the consequence.
 
Drawdown said:
Invoking a legally recognized power is not obstruction. It was his right. The democrats elected not to litigate the extent of that right. That was their mistake. It was litigating the recordings that brought down Nixon. Masturbating over the process to get it in before the 2020 election was a DNC decision. They will now suffer the consequence.
Click to expand...

Should we hear all the evidence in this trial?
 
Drawdown said:
Invoking a legally recognized power is not obstruction. It was his right. The democrats elected not to litigate the extent of that right. That was their mistake. It was litigating the recordings that brought down Nixon. Masturbating over the process to get it in before the 2020 election was a DNC decision. They will now suffer the consequence.
Click to expand...

The biggest thing to remember is if Trump is innocent he only has to do one thing, Either let those in the room testify or release a recording or transcript of the call. That's it, proof positive one way or the other.
 
Rising Sun said:
Why do you think it is a sham? Do you agree that Trump withheld Congressionally approved military aid in order to strongarm a personal "favor" from Zelensky? To wit: a public announcement about investigating Joe Biden?
Click to expand...

You are connecting the dots you want to as far as a personal favor goes. It's all a rorschach test and you see what you want to see. In addition, the aid was only held up for two weeks and Ukraine didn't even know it was being held up and it did not effect their military. With you guys it is always Trump wanted to do this, might do that, maybe did that, could have done this, is thinking about doing this .........................................
 
daeler said:
The biggest thing to remember is if Trump is innocent he only has to do one thing, Either let those in the room testify or release a recording or transcript of the call. That's it, proof positive one way or the other.
Click to expand...

Oh he is terrified of all the evidence coming out
 
daeler said:
The biggest thing to remember is if Trump is innocent he only has to do one thing, Either let those in the room testify or release a recording or transcript of the call. That's it, proof positive one way or the other.
Click to expand...

The burden is on the House, not the POTUS. He has no duty to waive executive privilege. That it exists and is legally recognized happened for a reason.
 
Moderate Right said:
If you already have overwhelming evidence, what's the point? Do you have overwhelming evidence or don't you?
Click to expand...

So you only want to see some of the evidence?


Will someone die if Bolton testifies???? Lol
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom