Announcement

Collapse

Civics 101 Guidelines

Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!

Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less

Take This Impeachment And Shove It...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
    In support of that:

    "The Senate is meant to act as judge and jury, to hear a trial, not to re-run the entire fact-finding investigation because angry partisans rushed sloppily through it,” - Senator McConnell
    Face it Sparko, you don't want a trial, none of you do, you want it dismissed and covered up, because none of you either care about, or can handle, the truth.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
      If these witnesses have evidence that would convict Trump, why didn't the House call them?

      It is up to the House to provide the evidence to support their case. If they can't then the case drops.

      They haven't proved anything.
      That's where the supposed "obstruction of Congress" charge comes in, the narrative being that Democrats could have totally proved their case against Trump if he hadn't obstructed them. The problem, of course, is that the House never went to the courts to compel witnesses to testify, or to force the White House to release documents, and they refused to defend any subpoena that the White House challenged insisting that it would have taken too much time and they didn't really need the evidence anyway. It's not the Senate's job to fix the House's case against the President.
      Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
      But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
      Than a fool in the eyes of God


      From "Fools Gold" by Petra

      Comment


      • Originally posted by JimL View Post
        Face it Sparko, you don't want a trial, none of you do, you want it dismissed and covered up, because none of you either care about, or can handle, the truth.
        The evidence and witnesses are to be presented by the House. Then they pass it to the Senate to judge. The Senate doesn't do investigation. That would be taking the power from the House.

        I am fine if they want to call witnesses though. They would be calling witnesses that supported Trump, just like the Democrats only called witnesses to condemn Trump. The whole House investigation and impeachment was a joke. They provided no actual evidence of a crime, and now that they know how weak their case is, they want to have a do-over in the Senate. But they are the minority there and have no power. It would only be fair if the Republicans treated the Democrats in the Senate the way the Democrats in the House treated the Republican Representatives.

        The Democrats made their bed and now they have to lie in it.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimL View Post
          Face it Sparko, you don't want a trial, none of you do, you want it dismissed and covered up, because none of you either care about, or can handle, the truth.
          When you use absurdly incendiary language like this, JimL, it's a sure sign you have nothing to stand on, and are attempting to goad us into not seeing that.
          Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

          Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
          sigpic
          I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

          Comment


          • When evidence of his financial mischief becomes available next year, there is a very good chance that Trump will be impeached for a second time.

            McConnell seems to think that trials should not have witnesses, and the jury should work with the accused. What a very odd and creepy fellow he is.
            “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
            “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
            “not all there” - you know who you are

            Comment


            • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
              When evidence of his financial mischief becomes available next year, there is a very good chance that Trump will be impeached for a second time.

              McConnell seems to think that trials should not have witnesses, and the jury should work with the accused. What a very odd and creepy fellow he is.
              It's up to the house to interview the witnesses and do the investigation. They are the "prosecution" - if they cannot prove their case, the Senate (judge and jury) must acquit. They haven't proven anything. The Articles of impeachment contain no actual evidence, just accusations. Very weakly worded.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                It's up to the house to interview the witnesses and do the investigation. They are the "prosecution" - if they cannot prove their case, the Senate (judge and jury) must acquit. They haven't proven anything. The Articles of impeachment contain no actual evidence, just accusations. Very weakly worded.
                And the accusations do not name actual crimes.
                Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
                But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
                Than a fool in the eyes of God


                From "Fools Gold" by Petra

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                  And the accusations do not name actual crimes.
                  Heck the core accusation is just rumor mongering. The whistleblower only heard the information third hand, if he didn't make it up whole cloth. Isn't there also something in the constitution about being able to face your accusers?

                  6th amendment: "in all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right…to be confronted with the witnesses against him."

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Watermelon View Post
                    Can they really just toss it out without having compelled testimonies from witnesses who reputedly have the most significant knowledge about this matter but have not yet testified?

                    Do you think a judge or anyone that’s actually interested in the truth would be ok with that? Sounds like oath is being ignored........ and a mistrial.
                    First the Senate gets to set it's own rules just like the House. This is another reason why the House should have been a lot more scrupulous about its rules and being very careful to avoid any show of partisanship. The Senate gets to play the same game.

                    Second, the Senate, just like a judge, can rule on the validity of the case being brought. The courts are under no obligation to adjudicate frivolous cases or cases in which no criminal charges are filed. Impeachment is a weird critter but it has historically been a response to criminal activity. The House wants to change that but the Senate isn't required to agree.

                    I'd much prefer a trial and I don't like setting such a precedent but it is silly to say that the House can ignore precedent and rules of evidence but the Senate has to act as if it were an ordinary court. It isn't. It is coequal with the Supreme Court, not the Courts inferior.
                    "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot

                    "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

                    My Personal Blog

                    My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

                    Quill Sword

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by JimL View Post
                      Glad to see that ...
                      Any time you start with this nonsense, the rest of your post is going to be garbage.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                        In support of that:

                        "The Senate is meant to act as judge and jury, to hear a trial, not to re-run the entire fact-finding investigation because angry partisans rushed sloppily through it,” - Senator McConnell
                        Correct - the Senate is like jury deliberating on the case presented by the House.
                        The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Charles View Post
                          And what is the exact point in the above statement with regard to impeachment?
                          A) This was not addressed to you
                          2) There is nothing that requires it address every point of ff's post
                          C) Mind your own business
                          The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                            When evidence of his financial mischief becomes available next year, there is a very good chance that Trump will be impeached for a second time.
                            Since it's all political, that depends on who has control of the House.

                            McConnell seems to think that trials should not have witnesses, and the jury should work with the accused. What a very odd and creepy fellow he is.
                            The House owns and controls impeachment - the Senate owns and controls conviction and removal.
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Correct - the Senate is like jury deliberating on the case presented by the House.
                              Also I believe the Constitution says the Senate trial will be led by the Chief Justice of SCOTUS. John Roberts. So it is possible that he could decide to call witnesses. Any decisions he makes in the trial can be overturned by 51% of the Senators though. And the final vote has to be 2/3rds in order to convict.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Sparko View Post
                                Also I believe the Constitution says the Senate trial will be led by the Chief Justice of SCOTUS. John Roberts. So it is possible that he could decide to call witnesses. Any decisions he makes in the trial can be overturned by 51% of the Senators though. And the final vote has to be 2/3rds in order to convict.
                                I think - and I'll try to find it - that the Chief Justice is there more in the role of judge, in that he doesn't actually take an active part in the trial, but regulates the flow and resolves disputes.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, Yesterday, 04:19 PM
                                6 responses
                                45 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                42 responses
                                231 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post whag
                                by whag
                                 
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                24 responses
                                104 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Ronson
                                by Ronson
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                32 responses
                                176 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                73 responses
                                291 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X