IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , impeachment , Mitch McConnell , partisanship , partisanship charges , partisanship issues , Trump impeachment

Reply
Old 13th December 2019, 08:38 AM   #41
BobTheCoward
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 21,135
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
No they ARE NOT. Before the trial every Senator must take an oath to be impartial and uphold the Constitution.
You are correct. I am wrong.
BobTheCoward is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 08:41 AM   #42
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,890
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
Impeachment should be up to the Supreme Court, and the threshold should be high.
That's worse. A thousand times worse.

At the very least right now every 2 years the two tribes have to put at least some token effort of pretending like they give a crap about the people so they get enough votes to maintain the tipping points in Congress.

With your plan get 5 person majority on the Supreme Court on your side and boom... you're set for life.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:10 AM   #43
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29,363
Rumor has it that right out of the gate, McConnell will move to acquit, not dismiss the charges.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:12 AM   #44
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I have come to the conclusion that Impeachment is a deeply flawed method for a check on power on the President, precisely because it tries to turn a legislative body into a judicial one: this undermines the credibility of such a process.
Impeachment should be up to the Supreme Court, and the threshold should be high.
Your solution would try to turn a judicial body into a political one. A prospect the Supreme Court has consistently rejected over the years.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:14 AM   #45
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29,363
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Your solution would try to turn a judicial body into a political one. A prospect the Supreme Court has consistently rejected over the years.
If you don't think the Supreme Court is a political body, you haven't been paying attention.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:16 AM   #46
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,890
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Rumor has it that right out of the gate, McConnell will move to acquit, not dismiss the charges.
Oh most probably. They want to turn this into a "win" not just a... neutral.

They want the strongest "This proves Trump is innocent" narrative they can get out of this.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:16 AM   #47
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 90,559
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
Rumor has it that right out of the gate, McConnell will move to acquit, not dismiss the charges.
Are thouse two options actually available?
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:19 AM   #48
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 15,786
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Your solution would try to turn a judicial body into a political one. A prospect the Supreme Court has consistently rejected over the years.
not if the case is decided on the merits.

And I would suggest that more than a simple majority would be necessary.


how much worse than the current system, which has never worked so far, can it be?
__________________
“You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”
-Anne Lamott
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:21 AM   #49
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
If you don't think the Supreme Court is a political body, you haven't been paying attention.
It's not that I don't think the Supreme Court is a political body. It's that the Supreme Court itself has repeatedly invoked a doctrine of political questions to recuse itself from certain Constitutional disputes. There are many SCOTUS rulings that say, in essence, "this is political; it needs to be resolved by the other two branches amongst themselves." I think the Supreme Court would almost certainly apply this doctrine to the question of impeachment.

I think it's an obviously political process, and was always intended as such, and that this is the right way to handle it. I do not believe, nor intend to suggest, that the SCOTUS judges are not political creatures.

Last edited by theprestige; 13th December 2019 at 09:32 AM.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:22 AM   #50
plague311
Great minds think...
 
plague311's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: North Dakota
Posts: 10,093
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Are thouse two options actually available?
I can't think of why immediate acquittal wouldn't be an option. The part I don't get is how they can strip the Dems of being able to call any witnesses or anything like that. I assume, though, that since they have the majority they're working on the premise that giving impeachment any attention would be justifying it. If you kick it immediately you can say, "Ok, we're done with that. Lets move on." Which is exactly what the GOP wants. Given the results in Britain, as dangerous as drawing connections can be, the world is turning more conservative everyday.
__________________
"Circumcision and death threats go together like milk and cookies." - William Parcher

“There are times when the mind is dealt such a blow it hides itself in insanity. While this may not seem beneficial, it is. There are times when reality is nothing but pain, and to escape that pain the mind must leave reality behind.” - Patrick Rothfuss
plague311 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:23 AM   #51
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29,363
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Are thouse two options actually available?
I don't believe "dismiss" is available, but acquit possibly/probably. A GOP Senator will be recognized by Roberts and he can make a motion to acquit and then it will be seconded. Then they will record the vote and if 51 vote Aye on the motion, it's over.

I think.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:28 AM   #52
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29,363
Originally Posted by plague311 View Post
I can't think of why immediate acquittal wouldn't be an option. The part I don't get is how they can strip the Dems of being able to call any witnesses or anything like that. I assume, though, that since they have the majority they're working on the premise that giving impeachment any attention would be justifying it. If you kick it immediately you can say, "Ok, we're done with that. Lets move on." Which is exactly what the GOP wants. Given the results in Britain, as dangerous as drawing connections can be, the world is turning more conservative everyday.
The problem with immediate acquittal is political and how it would be viewed through the lens of history. The Constitution mandates a trial in the Senate. For the Senate not to take it seriously would look bad.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:31 AM   #53
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
not if the case is decided on the merits.
It's not a question of the legal merits of the case. It's not a simple question of removing the president for breaking the law. Clinton broke the law when he committed perjury. The question is whether we, as a nation, want to remove the president from office over it. This is a political question that the courts should not decide.

If questions were decided purely on the legal merits, jury nullification wouldn't be a thing. But it is. Because in a democracy, the will of the people is always in tension with the rule of law, and that tension cannot always properly be relieved by siding with the rule of law.

Quote:
And I would suggest that more than a simple majority would be necessary.
I'm on board with this suggestion.

Quote:
how much worse than the current system, which has never worked so far, can it be?
I disagree that it has never worked. I think it worked just fine with Clinton. He was tried, and he was acquitted. What more could you ask from the system? Do you think the system was improperly applied? The House missed the mark in its arguments for removal? The Senate was remiss in its duty to properly consider those arguments and vote for removal? How did the system not work, in the case of President Clinton's impeachment?

Furthermore, "how much worse could it be?" seems like a terrible reason to make a major change to a system of government. That's not the kind experiment I think we should ever try.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:33 AM   #54
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
The problem with immediate acquittal is political and how it would be viewed through the lens of history. The Constitution mandates a trial in the Senate. For the Senate not to take it seriously would look bad.
I'm not sure it's a good idea to base major policy decisions on the hypothetical feels of future historians.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:34 AM   #55
varwoche
Penultimate Amazing
 
varwoche's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Puget Sound
Posts: 15,622
Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
I've been saying for some time that impeachment is a practical impossibility and, to all intents and purposes, not something that actually exists in the US system.
Given this reality, and given DOJ policy that a POTUS can't be indicted, Trump can actually shoot people dead and there's not a thing that can be done. It can't be 5th ave though; the NY cops will nab him. It needs to be on federal property.
__________________
To survive election season on a skeptics forum, one must understand Hymie-the-Robot.
varwoche is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:36 AM   #56
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,890
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
The problem with immediate acquittal is political and how it would be viewed through the lens of history. The Constitution mandates a trial in the Senate. For the Senate not to take it seriously would look bad.
You can't use the "Oh but history is going to harshly judge you" argument against people who aggressively don't care that the Earth is going to be a burned out cinder in a few generations.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:49 AM   #57
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,890
At least one Democrat (Rep Val Demings, FL) is openly calling for McConnell to recuse himself from the Senate Trial.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:55 AM   #58
acbytesla
Penultimate Amazing
 
acbytesla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 29,363
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
You can't use the "Oh but history is going to harshly judge you" argument against people who aggressively don't care that the Earth is going to be a burned out cinder in a few generations.
I don't disagree. If they don't care, then they don't care. For them it's simply a political calculation.
__________________
Just because I'm paranoid doesn't mean they're not out to get to me.
.
acbytesla is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:56 AM   #59
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
At least one Democrat (Rep Val Demings, FL) is openly calling for McConnell to recuse himself from the Senate Trial.
Maybe Biden, Booker, Bennet, Klobuchar, Sanders, and Warren should also recuse themselves.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 09:58 AM   #60
ahhell
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 3,730
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
No they ARE NOT. Before the trial every Senator must take an oath to be impartial and uphold the Constitution.
Do you have evidence for this? Aside from the oath of office which requires them to protect and defend the constitution, I am unaware of any additional oath required for impeachments.

Last edited by ahhell; 13th December 2019 at 10:00 AM.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:07 AM   #61
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,890
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
Do you have evidence for this? Aside from the oath of office which requires them to protect and defend the constitution, I am unaware of any additional oath required for impeachments.
Senate Resolution 479 - An original resolution amending the Rules of Procedure and Practice in the Senate when sitting on impeachment trials. 99th Congress (1985-1986).

Section IX:

"I ______________ do solemnly swear that the return made by me upon the process issued on the _____ day of _____, by the Senate of the United States against, _______________, is truly made, and that I have performed such service as prescribed within: So Help Me God."
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:22 AM   #62
ChristianProgressive
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,846
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
That's worse. A thousand times worse.

At the very least right now every 2 years the two tribes have to put at least some token effort of pretending like they give a crap about the people so they get enough votes to maintain the tipping points in Congress.

With your plan get 5 person majority on the Supreme Court on your side and boom... you're set for life.
Which is exactly what the GOP has been doing with their judicial appointments, packing the court with extreme reactionaries.

Impeachment should be a function of law enforcement and made 100% outside the ability of any political appointee to influence.
__________________
Please do your part to control the feral Conservative population. Make sure to always spay or neuter your Republican.
ChristianProgressive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:24 AM   #63
ChristianProgressive
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,846
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It's not that I don't think the Supreme Court is a political body. It's that the Supreme Court itself has repeatedly invoked a doctrine of political questions to recuse itself from certain Constitutional disputes. There are many SCOTUS rulings that say, in essence, "this is political; it needs to be resolved by the other two branches amongst themselves." I think the Supreme Court would almost certainly apply this doctrine to the question of impeachment.

I think it's an obviously political process, and was always intended as such, and that this is the right way to handle it. I do not believe, nor intend to suggest, that the SCOTUS judges are not political creatures.
SCOTUS, especially under Roberts, has consistently refused to hold itself to the Canons of Judicial Ethics involving conflicts of interest.
__________________
Please do your part to control the feral Conservative population. Make sure to always spay or neuter your Republican.
ChristianProgressive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:25 AM   #64
ChristianProgressive
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,846
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
The problem with immediate acquittal is political and how it would be viewed through the lens of history. The Constitution mandates a trial in the Senate. For the Senate not to take it seriously would look bad.
History is written by the victors.
__________________
Please do your part to control the feral Conservative population. Make sure to always spay or neuter your Republican.
ChristianProgressive is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:48 AM   #65
Kestrel
Philosopher
 
Kestrel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Colorado
Posts: 6,152
Under existing Senate rules, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court will be the Presiding officer of an impeachment trial. The defense team could ask the Presiding officer to dismiss the charges just as in a normal trial. The Presiding officer would then rule on that motion. Chief Justice Roberts is unlikely to dismiss the charges but he doesn't have the final word. The rules allow the Senate to overrule the Presiding officer with a majority vote. A Senator could object to the ruling and call for a vote. If party discipline held, the charges could be dismissed and the impeachment trial would be over without any witnesses or discussion of the evidence.
Kestrel is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:51 AM   #66
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
I have come to the conclusion that Impeachment is a deeply flawed method for a check on power on the President, precisely because it tries to turn a legislative body into a judicial one: this undermines the credibility of such a process.
Impeachment should be up to the Supreme Court, and the threshold should be high.
The Supreme Court are appointed by politicians and sit for life. Making them decide whether or not a president has done anything wrong in a hyper-partisan environment and when it's as easy as it's proven to be to stack it to favour one particular political party, seems like a bad idea.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:53 AM   #67
Squeegee Beckenheim
Penultimate Amazing
 
Squeegee Beckenheim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 32,124
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
The problem with immediate acquittal is political and how it would be viewed through the lens of history. The Constitution mandates a trial in the Senate. For the Senate not to take it seriously would look bad.
I think we're long past the stage of Republicans worrying about whether or not something will look bad.
__________________
I don't trust atoms. They make up everything.
Squeegee Beckenheim is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 10:58 AM   #68
TragicMonkey
Poisoned Waffles
 
TragicMonkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Monkey
Posts: 60,816
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
I think we're long past the stage of Republicans worrying about whether or not something will look bad.
"Lord Vader, if you skip the ribbon-cutting for the new children's hospital your critics may say it shows you aren't entirely nice!"
__________________
You added nothing to that conversation, Barbara.
TragicMonkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:25 AM   #69
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 15,786
If Republican Senators don't convict Trump, just impeach them all
- problem solved.
__________________
“You can safely assume you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do.”
-Anne Lamott
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:26 AM   #70
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
If Republican Senators don't convict Trump, just impeach them all
- problem solved.
I mean, you're not wrong. You just have to be content to let their actual constituents decide.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:38 AM   #71
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive View Post
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...on-impeachment

The fix is formally in. Traitor Trump has openly added jury tampering to his list of crimes.
As one poster said, it's like the jury consulting with the accused.

So much for separations of power.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:40 AM   #72
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by SuburbanTurkey View Post
It's hard to say exactly when it started, but we're living in the era of the imperial presidency. It's inconceivable that Republicans would ever impeach one of their own, and I really doubt that Democrats would at this point either. It's hard to imagine either party getting a super-majority in the Senate, so the impeachment power is essentially neutralized.
It also means that no future amendment is going to happen, and that even passing bills is going to be hard.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:43 AM   #73
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 34,890
Can any concept of "Separation/Balance of Power"/"Checks and Balances" not fall victim to the "Powers" forming unofficial groups outside the separation?

It certainly seems to me like "We're gonna form a club and just not go after people in our club" counters any possible "Separation of Power" anyone could put on the table.
__________________
"When enough people make false promises, words stop meaning anything. Then there are no more answers, only better and better lies." - Jon Snow

"Every lie we tell incurs a debt to the truth. Sooner or later, that debt is paid." - Valery Legasov

Last edited by JoeMorgue; 13th December 2019 at 11:46 AM.
JoeMorgue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:44 AM   #74
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by alfaniner View Post
I was appalled to see that snippet on the news this morning. The branches are supposed to be separate but equal, and here McConnell says right out that he is working with the White House. This would be just as wrong if he were a Democrat trying to work out a deal.
It's just a snippet of truth that demonstrates that the parties have become the only branches of government.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:46 AM   #75
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
Can any concept of "Separation of Power" not fail to the "Powers" forming unofficial groups?

It certainly seems to me like "We're gonna form a club and just not go after people in our club" counters any possible "Separation of Power" anyone could put on the table.
Only having elected members of those branches sur doesn't help. They're all in the same teams and have to work to get elected. SCOTUS has avoided that so far.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:49 AM   #76
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by acbytesla View Post
The problem with immediate acquittal is political and how it would be viewed through the lens of history. The Constitution mandates a trial in the Senate. For the Senate not to take it seriously would look bad.
I'm sure the GOP is seriously worried about looking bad!
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 11:55 AM   #77
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Maybe Biden, Booker, Bennet, Klobuchar, Sanders, and Warren should also recuse themselves.
Why, did they indicate they'd act inappropriately in this affair too?

Originally Posted by ChristianProgressive View Post
History is written by the victors.
An old adage that's not even true.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 12:01 PM   #78
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 53,741
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Why, did they indicate they'd act inappropriately in this affair too?
Why run the risk?
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 12:03 PM   #79
Babbylonian
Penultimate Amazing
 
Babbylonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 13,706
I know times are dark, but if even 5% of Republicans around the nation are as disgusted by the open approval of Trump's misconduct as the rest of us, incumbent Republican senators could start dropping like flies.

McConnell and company believe there are no lines they can't cross with impunity while holding their base, but they don't have to lose them all to lose their power.
Babbylonian is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2019, 12:05 PM   #80
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In a post-fact world
Posts: 96,875
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Why run the risk?
How about Congress recuse itself?
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:50 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.