Politics And Current Events

Faftorial
Posts: 3475
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Faftorial » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:15 pm

Will they present a defense of Trump's actions or just complain of what the house did?

Faftorial
Posts: 3475
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Faftorial » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:22 pm

Here's the argument that no new evidence should be introduced in the Senate...

grunthy
Posts: 17399
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:29 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby grunthy » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:26 pm

Should the senators that are possibly running against trump recuse themselves?
What would be the reason to? Impartiality? Then Republicans would have to also.
Should people running against a political opponent be allowed to vote to remove that person from the office?

Why would the republicans have to?
This is a joke, right?
It’s a **** ing discussion. If Democrats are asking for the WH council to recuse, and McConnell to recuse himself, why is this so outlandish of a discussion?

tifosi77
Posts: 36679
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby tifosi77 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:27 pm

I mean, the guy running the trial said he is in complete lockstep with the 'defendant' in the proceeding and coordinating with his defense team; should he recuse himself, seeing as such a statement is plainly contrary to the oath of impartiality he just swore?

I'm not going to deny that it's a bad look, and I've been saying so for months. But I honestly don't know if the Senate rules allow or even contemplate recusal from an impeachment proceeding. I know multiple parties have said various members of the other party should recuse themselves for a variety of reasons, but everything I've read is that the rules require the participation of the full Senate.

grunthy
Posts: 17399
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:29 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby grunthy » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:29 pm

Should the senators that are possibly running against trump recuse themselves?
What would be the reason to? Impartiality? Then Republicans would have to also.
Should people running against a political opponent be allowed to vote to remove that person from the office?
Why? Because they cannot be impartial, or because it gives the look of not being impartial? The same is true of every Republican, as they count on the president to drum up support down ballot and will be putting their reelection bids in jeopardy if they vote against him.

If you want a shallower answer though, none of them are the nominee yet. In fact Trump isn't even a nominee yet. So until the convention it's sitting senators doing their elected duty of oversight on Executive.
Re-election bids are completely different than actively running against someone.

Sure they aren’t the nominee yet, but they could be deciding who they are running against.

(I’m not for or against either. We already know everyone’s vote in this partisan **** show. Just figured we could have a discussion, but apparently not with some people. Not directed at you Cbear.)

tifosi77
Posts: 36679
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 1:07 pm
Location: Home
Contact:

Politics And Current Events

Postby tifosi77 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:31 pm

Will they present a defense of Trump's actions or just complain of what the house did?
The reporting I've read is that pretty much since this whole escapade started, the more pragmatic members of the GOP have been arguing for a defense of "wrong, but not impeachable" (which was more or less the Clinton defense). But Trump is so..... Trumpy that he won't stand for that. It has to be a 'perfect call' and that there was nothing wrong and I-have-an-Article-2 blah blah blah.

CBear3
Posts: 4995
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

Politics And Current Events

Postby CBear3 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:44 pm

Should the senators that are possibly running against trump recuse themselves?
What would be the reason to? Impartiality? Then Republicans would have to also.
Should people running against a political opponent be allowed to vote to remove that person from the office?
Why? Because they cannot be impartial, or because it gives the look of not being impartial? The same is true of every Republican, as they count on the president to drum up support down ballot and will be putting their reelection bids in jeopardy if they vote against him.

If you want a shallower answer though, none of them are the nominee yet. In fact Trump isn't even a nominee yet. So until the convention it's sitting senators doing their elected duty of oversight on Executive.
Re-election bids are completely different than actively running against someone.

Sure they aren’t the nominee yet, but they could be deciding who they are running against.

(I’m not for or against either. We already know everyone’s vote in this partisan **** show. Just figured we could have a discussion, but apparently not with some people. Not directed at you Cbear.)
I get it. From an ethics standpoint its touchy. If say Warren or Sanders were Majority leader of the Senate it'd probably look even worse because of the amount of control they'd have over the situation. In this case though, they're all just another face in a crowd. And that's not to say McConnell should recuse, although coming out and advertising he's in lock step with the accused is awful ugly. He doesn't have a personal gain at stake in reality, just the status quo so I wouldn't see a need for his recusal as well.

WH Counsel, implicated or not, are already fighting for their defendant so that's not an issue, they don't need to be impartial. AG Barr being expected to be impartial though isn't reasonable since he's been implicated, but luckily the AG has no role in Impeachment.

MR25
Posts: 11301
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 2:58 pm
Location: Gamehendge

Politics And Current Events

Postby MR25 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 4:56 pm



Why does Kushner have a security clearance, again?

Kaiser
Posts: 4209
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:35 pm
Location: In these uncertain times

Politics And Current Events

Postby Kaiser » Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:34 pm

They should recuse because of election reasons, from the impeachment trial of the president, who is impeached for f***ing with the elections. Bigly tremendous.

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 30587
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Politics And Current Events

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:50 pm


Pavel Bure
Posts: 4600
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:57 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Pavel Bure » Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:07 pm

**** old man Biden and **** pandering Warren

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 30587
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Politics And Current Events

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:29 pm

Why would Dems do this?


Gaucho
Posts: 31775
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 5:31 pm
Location: shootzepuckhlefraude

Politics And Current Events

Postby Gaucho » Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:35 pm


Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 30587
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Politics And Current Events

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:44 pm

#getmoneyoutofpolitics #saynotobillionaires

Faftorial
Posts: 3475
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Faftorial » Tue Jan 21, 2020 8:58 pm

**** old man Biden and **** pandering Warren
Bernie is the oldest one running.

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 30587
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Politics And Current Events

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Tue Jan 21, 2020 9:17 pm


CBear3
Posts: 4995
Joined: Fri Mar 27, 2015 10:02 pm
Location: KC, MO

Politics And Current Events

Postby CBear3 » Tue Jan 21, 2020 9:28 pm

Seriously. We all know he did it. This isn’t hard, just don’t screw up. But that’s too much to ask for the Dems, and they provide Trump’s base more “evidence” that it’s a hoax.

grunthy
Posts: 17399
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:29 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby grunthy » Tue Jan 21, 2020 9:41 pm

This is going to get all of them re-elected.

slappybrown
Posts: 16509
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:19 pm
Location: WPXI Facebook Page Comments Appreciator

Politics And Current Events

Postby slappybrown » Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:26 pm

Why would Dems do this?

I think a better question is why would Republicans do it

Pavel Bure
Posts: 4600
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:57 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Pavel Bure » Tue Jan 21, 2020 10:38 pm

**** old man Biden and **** pandering Warren
Bernie is the oldest one running.
Biden thinks weed is a gateway drug and video games cause violence. He’s extremely out of touch with... everything.

Faftorial
Posts: 3475
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Faftorial » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:08 pm

I've loathed Pam Bondi since the Florida circus in 2000 but she's really hot to this day.

grunthy
Posts: 17399
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2015 8:29 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby grunthy » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:29 pm

I've loathed Pam Bondi since the Florida circus in 2000 but she's really hot to this day.
What did Pam Bondi do in 2000?

Faftorial
Posts: 3475
Joined: Tue Nov 05, 2019 10:35 pm

Politics And Current Events

Postby Faftorial » Tue Jan 21, 2020 11:44 pm

google "pam bondi 2000 election"

Kaiser
Posts: 4209
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 10:35 pm
Location: In these uncertain times

Politics And Current Events

Postby Kaiser » Wed Jan 22, 2020 3:31 am

She looks like Krang with a wig.

Freddy Rumsen
Posts: 30587
Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry

Politics And Current Events

Postby Freddy Rumsen » Wed Jan 22, 2020 7:56 am

Good read.
Five months of ruin forgotten by all. In what ranks as one of the most heavily ignored and needless catastrophes in recent U.S. history, 548,000 acres of the lower Mississippi Delta, including 231,000 acres of farmland, were silently swallowed in 2019 and submerged for roughly 150 consecutive days. Multiple deaths, 686 homes swamped, three highways under water, and 20,000 people pleading for a modicum of common sense from the federal government, along with a host of Delta farmers unable to plant a single seed in 2019. An acreage zero. Nada. Heaping insult on injury, only a decade prior the source of salvation in the form of relief pumps had been vetoed by federal bureaucrats and deemed a liability by the Environmental Protection Agency.
https://www.agweb.com/article/great-sha ... m8u5BFJiT4

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], grunthy, Kane, tjand72 and 32 guests