Politics And Current Events
Politics And Current Events
Will they present a defense of Trump's actions or just complain of what the house did?
Politics And Current Events
Here's the argument that no new evidence should be introduced in the Senate...
Politics And Current Events
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?This is a joke, right?Should people running against a political opponent be allowed to vote to remove that person from the office?What would be the reason to? Impartiality? Then Republicans would have to also.Should the senators that are possibly running against trump recuse themselves?
Why would the republicans have to?
Politics And Current Events
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.
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.
Politics And Current Events
Re-election bids are completely different than actively running against someone.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.Should people running against a political opponent be allowed to vote to remove that person from the office?What would be the reason to? Impartiality? Then Republicans would have to also.Should the senators that are possibly running against trump recuse themselves?
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.
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.)
Politics And Current Events
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.Will they present a defense of Trump's actions or just complain of what the house did?
Politics And Current Events
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.Re-election bids are completely different than actively running against someone.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.Should people running against a political opponent be allowed to vote to remove that person from the office?What would be the reason to? Impartiality? Then Republicans would have to also.Should the senators that are possibly running against trump recuse themselves?
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.
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.)
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.
Politics And Current Events
Why does Kushner have a security clearance, again?
Politics And Current Events
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.
-
- Posts: 35315
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
-
- Posts: 7674
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:57 pm
Politics And Current Events
**** old man Biden and **** pandering Warren
-
- Posts: 35315
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Why would Dems do this?
-
- Posts: 35315
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
#getmoneyoutofpolitics #saynotobillionaires
Politics And Current Events
Bernie is the oldest one running.**** old man Biden and **** pandering Warren
-
- Posts: 35315
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
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.
Politics And Current Events
This is going to get all of them re-elected.
-
- Posts: 16580
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 4:19 pm
- Location: Lifelong Alabama Football Fan
Politics And Current Events
I think a better question is why would Republicans do itWhy would Dems do this?
-
- Posts: 7674
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 8:57 pm
Politics And Current Events
Biden thinks weed is a gateway drug and video games cause violence. He’s extremely out of touch with... everything.Bernie is the oldest one running.**** old man Biden and **** pandering Warren
Politics And Current Events
I've loathed Pam Bondi since the Florida circus in 2000 but she's really hot to this day.
Politics And Current Events
What did Pam Bondi do in 2000?I've loathed Pam Bondi since the Florida circus in 2000 but she's really hot to this day.
Politics And Current Events
google "pam bondi 2000 election"
Politics And Current Events
She looks like Krang with a wig.
-
- Posts: 35315
- Joined: Wed Mar 25, 2015 11:50 am
- Location: "Order is the only possibility of rest." -- Wendell Berry
Politics And Current Events
Good read.
https://www.agweb.com/article/great-sha ... m8u5BFJiT4Five 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.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 201 guests