d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Senate Impeachment Trial 2020
Prev15960616263134Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Jan 30 2020 08:15pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Jan 30 2020 05:56pm)
Point about Fast & Furious is pretty good
Obama exerted blanket executive privilege. It got tied up indefinitely in courts, never went anywhere for years. The house GOP held Eric Holder in contempt. Nobody impeached Obama.
If the democrat's own theory of 'blanket privilege without piecemeal responses is obstruction of justice', even in a timespan as short as weeks or even days, why didn't they vote to impeach Obama?


Because Paul Ryan was a weak speaker. And yea, it got tied up indefinitely in the courts which shows that the system is broken. The fact that we can't solve these things, quickly, is a massive problem.

Quote (ThatAlex @ Jan 30 2020 05:31pm)
I was responding to Black XistenZ and Thor's back and forth about Trump pressing Ukraine to investigate the Bidens. It actually is relevant to the impeachment trial and the Ukraine scandal.


If Biden used his power to funnel money to his son, were Trump's actions justified? Are his actions no longer an abuse of power?
Member
Posts: 57,901
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 286.00
Jan 30 2020 08:18pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Jan 30 2020 08:56pm)
Point about Fast & Furious is pretty good
Obama exerted blanket executive privilege. It got tied up indefinitely in courts, never went anywhere for years. The house GOP held Eric Holder in contempt. Nobody impeached Obama.
If the democrat's own theory of 'blanket privilege without piecemeal responses is obstruction of justice', even in a timespan as short as weeks or even days, why didn't they vote to impeach Obama?


Spoils system. Because they're all hypocrites.
Member
Posts: 15,467
Joined: Sep 15 2007
Gold: 475.46
Jan 30 2020 09:05pm
Quote (excellence @ Jan 30 2020 05:45pm)
The House already did a fact-finding mission and presented a case about the facts they found and decided it was enough to vote for impeachment on

why does the “GOP” need to fact-find when there is a case that was good enough for the House to move forward on? present the case as voted on


Because they should want to get all of the facts. If someone knows something about the trial they should be called. There is absolutely no good reason to make a decision before all of the relevant information is known.

Not to mention that it is normal practice to have whiteness in the senate.

The GOP is being willfully ignorant.

Trump also had something to do with witnesses not being able to testify in the house.

This post was edited by Brian_D on Jan 30 2020 09:07pm
Member
Posts: 49,898
Joined: Jun 19 2006
Gold: 3.88
Jan 30 2020 09:16pm
Why cant people be consistent?
Trump should be impeached, Biden should be investigated and charged, any impropriety from any figure on public money should be scrutinized and acted upon.
We need to raise our standards world wide and stop excusing corruption from the people we pay over generously to ruin our countries.
Member
Posts: 50,929
Joined: Jan 20 2010
Gold: 5,335.99
Jan 30 2020 10:33pm
Votes for witnesses:

{all 47 democrats}: Yes, presumably
{other 49 republicans}: No, presumably
Lamar Alexander: No, declared
Mitt Romney: Yes, presumably
Susan Collins: Yes, declared
Lisa Murkowski: Undecided, will declare tomorrow morning

The current tally is 49 yes, 50 no, 1 undecided.
If Murkowski declares she'll vote yes, it will be up to chief justice roberts to decline to cast a tiebreaker vote and thereby leaving witnesses blocked. There is zero expectation that Roberts will even attempt to cast a tiebreaker, something he's not necessarily even allowed to do under the constitution. If Murkowski declares she'll vote no, it will be a 51-49 split and won't go to Roberts.

This post was edited by Goomshill on Jan 30 2020 10:33pm
Member
Posts: 35,291
Joined: Aug 17 2004
Gold: 12,730.67
Jan 30 2020 10:46pm
Quote (Goomshill @ Jan 30 2020 08:33pm)
Votes for witnesses:

{all 47 democrats}: Yes, presumably
{other 49 republicans}: No, presumably
Lamar Alexander: No, declared
Mitt Romney: Yes, presumably
Susan Collins: Yes, declared
Lisa Murkowski: Undecided, will declare tomorrow morning

The current tally is 49 yes, 50 no, 1 undecided.
If Murkowski declares she'll vote yes, it will be up to chief justice roberts to decline to cast a tiebreaker vote and thereby leaving witnesses blocked. There is zero expectation that Roberts will even attempt to cast a tiebreaker, something he's not necessarily even allowed to do under the constitution. If Murkowski declares she'll vote no, it will be a 51-49 split and won't go to Roberts.


Yea, it's looking like he'll be acquitted tomorrow. I'm not convinced that any Senators are in danger with their votes either.
Member
Posts: 53,368
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 57.00
Jan 30 2020 10:51pm
Quote (Goomshill @ 30 Jan 2020 23:33)
Votes for witnesses:

{all 47 democrats}: Yes, presumably
{other 49 republicans}: No, presumably
Lamar Alexander: No, declared
Mitt Romney: Yes, presumably
Susan Collins: Yes, declared
Lisa Murkowski: Undecided, will declare tomorrow morning

The current tally is 49 yes, 50 no, 1 undecided.
If Murkowski declares she'll vote yes, it will be up to chief justice roberts to decline to cast a tiebreaker vote and thereby leaving witnesses blocked. There is zero expectation that Roberts will even attempt to cast a tiebreaker, something he's not necessarily even allowed to do under the constitution. If Murkowski declares she'll vote no, it will be a 51-49 split and won't go to Roberts.


good summary

Quote (thundercock @ 30 Jan 2020 23:46)
Yea, it's looking like he'll be acquitted tomorrow. I'm not convinced that any Senators are in danger with their votes either.


likely scenario but as we’ve seen in the last few years stranger things have happened
Member
Posts: 12,379
Joined: Jul 14 2008
Gold: 2,620.00
Jan 30 2020 10:56pm
Quote (thundercock @ 30 Jan 2020 19:15)
If Biden used his power to funnel money to his son, were Trump's actions justified? Are his actions no longer an abuse of power?


There is not a problem with investigating Biden in principle. The issue is that Trump unlawfully withheld federal aid in an attempt to leverage a foreign country to do so.
Member
Posts: 64,763
Joined: Oct 25 2006
Gold: 0.00
Jan 30 2020 10:59pm
Quote (ThatAlex @ Jan 30 2020 10:56pm)
There is not a problem with investigating Biden in principle. The issue is that Trump unlawfully withheld federal aid in an attempt to leverage a foreign country to do so.


And waited until it was politically convenient. If this had happened in 2017 everybody would just think its another of Trumps childish attempts at retribution. He specifically waited until it was beneficial to himself personally which makes it an abuse for personal gain.
Member
Posts: 12,379
Joined: Jul 14 2008
Gold: 2,620.00
Jan 30 2020 11:03pm
The Senate will acquit whether witnesses are allowed or not.

My question is this: Is it potentially more damaging to the GOP to block all witnesses rather than allow witnesses and then acquit?
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev15960616263134Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll