the whole point of the Trump presidency is that he's completely taken over and corrupted the Republican Party and is in the process of demonstrating that he's above the law. There's a good argument that this impeachment will actually end up being more like a coronation, but the Democrats really have no choice but to pursue it. At least they will have acted with honor be trying to uphold the Constitution in so doing.

HE ought be removed.
— creativesoul
I'm sure the Senate Ethics Committee will get right on that. — ZzzoneiroCosm

Still have not seen the video. If he openly and clearly stated that he could not be an impartial juror in this matter of impeachment, then he has confessed to not being able to perform one of the very specific duties bestowed only upon members of the Senate.

He has admitted to dereliction of duty. Given the historical unprecedented level of importance in these impeachment matters, McConnell ought at least recuse himself and/or resign. He has failed to perform as promised, and openly said that he could not do what the Constitution said he must as a member of the Senate. He said he cannot perform as instructed.

He has no business being a member of the jury of this impeachment trial.

We certainly would not allow a jury member openly professing that their position on the matter is aligned with the defendant's prior to the start of the trial.

If McConnell already believes that the impeachment is a "witch hunt", then he cannot act as an impartial juror. That is the sole responsibility of the Senate that makes it stand apart from all other governmental agencies/institutions.

Still have not seen the video. — creativesoul

It should be easy to Google. It was a televised Q and A. It was all over the news in the States.

McConnell ought at least recuse himself and/or resign — creativesoul

No need to resign when Fox News has Trump's base calling the impeachment a charade or hoax or (Hannity's favorite) a "Shiff Sham show."

I don't care about Fox News. I care about it when the Senate majority leader cannot perform the duties of all members of the Senate during an impeachment trial - and he's allowed to remain in place.

Mitch McConnell needs to recuse himself. He knows that he cannot do both... be and not be an impartial juror during the ongoing impeachment process.

I don't care about Fox News. I care about it when the Senate majority leader cannot perform the duties of all members of the Senate during an impeachment trial - and he's allowed to remain in place. — creativesoul

Lindsey Graham said something similar. It's the tack the hardcore Trumpsters are taking. It's a hoax and undeserving of an impartial hearing.

I don't care about Fox News. — creativesoul

Fox News' destructive influence is precisely why Graham and McConnell are convinced they can get away with this. Fox News defends, even congratulates, their non-impartiality.

The same measure would apply to Graham, and all other Senators who've already made public pronouncements of guilt or innocence.

Here's an op-ed defending your position. Quotes from McConnell and Graham included

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/479095-senator-jurors-who-may-not-be-impartial-remove-them-for-cause

Are you in the States? It's hard to believe you didn't catch this on the news if you are.

Fox News' destructive influence is precisely why Graham and McConnell are convinced they can get away with this. Fox News defends, even congratulates, their non-impartiality. — ZzzoneiroCosm

I'll take your word on that...

I'll take your word on that... — creativesoul

I've been watching a LOT of Fox News lately. Keeping a finger on the pulse of the nation, sadly.

I've been watching a LOT of Fox News lately. Keeping a finger on the pulse of the nation, sadly. — ZzzoneiroCosm

The pulse of Trump apologists...

Trumpian Apologetics...

:wink:

That has a nice ring to it...

The pulse of Trump apologists... — creativesoul

90% support among Republicans. It can't be ignored.

Trumpian Apologetics... — creativesoul

Sounds like a course in a late 21st Century Theology curriculum.

90% support among Republicans. It can't be ignored — ZzzoneiroCosm

That does not tell me enough to place much value upon it.

The trial ought not only be public... I'd be all in on public mandate to watch the trial...

The constitutional responsibility of Senate members during impeachment is clear. Justice Roberts reminded the Senate of it already. It needs to be enforced. No member who is not acting impartial to the evidence ought be allowed to continue. All members who cannot ought be dismissed from duty and resign their post, as they cannot fulfill the duties and/or obligations bestowed upon them. They cannot keep their pledge/oath.

If House Democrats failed to follow the correct procedures it’s not indicative of a witch-hunt, as NOS4A2 claims. If a criminal wins a legal case because of a procedural error by the prosecution that doesn’t mean they’re innocent or wrongly accused, for example.

The same rules for civil litigation do not apply to this impeachment trial. It is not just a civil case.

All the relevant evidence needs to be introduced.

Another full day of Democrat sophistry lined up. Note the assumption of guilt and question begging in all of it. Trump’s “corrupt scheme”, he “corruptly” did such and such, he extorted a foreign leader to get “dirt” on his political opponent in order to influence the 2020 election. None of this language is warranted because none of the accusations have been proven, but it is being repeated incessantly.

Again, this type of sophistry works well on those already to the ears in anti-Trump hysteria, and possibly a couple senators as well. But in combination with the cries for more evidence and testimony it also suggests the House has no case and I suspect these lies will be deconstructed during the defence.

Can you explain this better? Are you saying that the House (as an entity) must pass judgement on impeachment, before any request for evidence is valid?

Yes the power of impeachment extends to the full house, not any one individual house member or committee. Therefore any subpoena issued before the house vote for an impeachment inquiry is invalid. This is one of the many arguments in the White House impeachment memorandum, which deserves a read.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Trial-Memorandum-of-President-Donald-J.-Trump.pdf

By having the full power of impeachment, no other body has Constitutional authority to deem anything that transpires as invalid. You may judge it unfair, but you can't claim it's unconstitutional.

That phrase only means that no other entity but the house has the power to impeach, not that the constitution no longer applies to congress. It does not give them the power to ignore constitutional constraints such as the due process clause of the constitution which applies to all of the US government.

these [facts] will be deconstructed during the defence. — NOS4A2

Fat chance of that. The defense will willfully eschew direct confrontation with the facts. Expect a cocktail of Kavanoise and whataboutism.

Fat chance of that. The defense will willfully eschew direct confrontation with the facts. Expect a cocktail of Kavanoise and whataboutism.

Proving the double standard about withholding aid and stonewalling congress is the easy part. There is video of everyone, both republican and Democrat, saying the exact opposite of what they say now. It will also be easy pointing out Schiff’s lies and sophistry given the documented evidence of them.

Another full day of Democrat sophistry lined up. — NOS4A2

Is Pro-Trump sophistry somehow exempt of hysteria?

is Pro-Trump sophistry somehow exempt of hysteria?

I’m not sure how sophistry can have hysteria.

Proving the double standard about withholding aid...is the easy part. — NOS4A2

A lie.

"Other Trump allies have been parroting this line in recent days. The most obvious problem with this reasoning is that, as others have pointed out, Trump is accused of withholding foreign military aid for corrupt, personal and political purposes. The simple truth is that there aren’t any other examples that match that definition."

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/01/23/trumps-lawyers-dont-understand-how-foreign-aid-works/

There is video of everyone, both republican and Democrat, saying the exact opposite of what they say now. — NOS4A2

A broadbrush lie. Those are fun.

Here you go, padding your thought with the thought of someone else’s, like a good parrot. And cherry picking too.

It will also be easy pointing out Schiff’s lies and sophistry given the documented evidence of them. — NOS4A2

Can you provide a reference detailing the scope and substance of "Schiff's lies?"