It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Democrats Already Attacking Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell

page: 4
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Yeah.

Last time I checked McConnell is a Senator, hence "juror," hence impartiality (at least in theory) in a "trial." Schiff is neither of those.

Judges and juries are supposed to be impartial. Prosecutors and investigators, not so much.

edit on 14-12-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

When did Adam Schiff become a prosecutor?


The boy has one heck of a resume, I'll give him that. He was a US Representative, a legislator, only a few weeks ago.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:08 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

When? Probably after law school. He's a former prosecutor. He's also, essentially, an investigator in these proceedings. Also, he *is* a US Representative, not was.

McConnell, on the other hand, is a Senator, and *should* be impartial during an impeachment trial, as all Senators should.

Hence my original point.



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:08 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: TheRedneck

Yeah.

Last time I checked McConnell is a Senator, hence "juror," hence impartiality (at least in theory) in a "trial." Schiff is neither of those.

Judges and juries are supposed to be impartial. Prosecutors and investigators, not so much.


Its ridiculous to liken the impeachment process to a legal hearing; it is even close to the same. Impeachment is a political process, you would hope all involved would put the country first before party and personal gain, but it is unfortunately not a requirement.

Your just upset that your tribe just gets to ask for the political hearing; while the other tribe gets to make the final determination on guilt. I suspected you'd like it a lot more if the political power dynamic was the other way round.



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:12 PM
link   
a reply to: DanDanDat

It's comparative, but not the same.


you would hope all involved would put the country first before party and personal gain


That is the entire point.



Your just upset that your tribe just gets to ask for the political hearing; while the other tribe gets to make the final determination on guilt.


I thought it's about country first, not tribes? But it is about tribe, that's why we're here.

*you're



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: TheRedneck

When? Probably after law school. He's a former prosecutor. He's also, essentially, an investigator in these proceedings. Also, he *is* a US Representative, not was.

McConnell, on the other hand, is a Senator, and *should* be impartial during an impeachment trial, as all Senators should.

Hence my original point.


How would you get impartiality from the senators running for president against Trump?



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:25 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence


When? Probably after law school. He's a former prosecutor. He's also, essentially, an investigator in these proceedings. Also, he *is* a US Representative, not was.

If you're trying to liken an actual criminal procedure to this impeachment, you're failing.

First, in a grand jury setting (which I have been in) all jurors get to request witnesses, not just the ones who think there is guilt.

Second, the lead juror does not get to tell the other jurors what questions they may ask a witness.

Third, the prosecutor is not a part of the grand jury. He calls the grand jury.

Fourth, the investigators are not part of the grand jury. They report to the grand jury.

Fifth, the idea of a grand jury is to indict when there is sufficient evidence to believe there is a reasonable chance of conviction.


McConnell, on the other hand, is a Senator, and *should* be impartial during an impeachment trial, as all Senators should.

Are we having the trial already?


TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:29 PM
link   
a reply to: DBCowboy


How would you get impartiality from the senators running for president against Trump?

Good point. We need to recuse Harris, Warren, and Sanders.

I think I heard all of them already claim that Trump is guilty and should be removed form office.

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: TheRedneck

When? Probably after law school. He's a former prosecutor. He's also, essentially, an investigator in these proceedings. Also, he *is* a US Representative, not was.

McConnell, on the other hand, is a Senator, and *should* be impartial during an impeachment trial, as all Senators should.

Hence my original point.


How would you get impartiality from the senators running for president against Trump?


How would you get impartiality from the senators aligned with trump that said they would not be impartial?



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: DBCowboy


How would you get impartiality from the senators running for president against Trump?

Good point. We need to recuse Harris, Warren, and Sanders.

I think I heard all of them already claim that Trump is guilty and should be removed form office.

TheRedneck


And McConnell and Graham. They already claimed they have pre-determined how they will conduct or vote, regardless of anything that happens.
Fair enough?



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Fair enough.

When is the Constitutional Convention?

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

I know it's not the same as a criminal procedure, but the ethics remain.



First, in a grand jury setting (which I have been in) all jurors get to request witnesses, not just the ones who think there is guilt.


This is not. But whether the request can be granted or not is one of the questions.


Second, the lead juror does not get to tell the other jurors what questions they may ask a witness.


This is not a grand jury, but the Senate essentially acts as jury, in theory.


Third, the prosecutor is not a part of the grand jury. He calls the grand jury.

This is not a grand jury, so irrelevant.


Fourth, the investigators are not part of the grand jury. They report to the grand jury.


Investigators are never part of juries. They are witnesses.

Again, this is not a grand jury proceeding.


Are we having the trial already?


Who knows.



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 09:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: Liquesence

Fair enough.

When is the Constitutional Convention?

TheRedneck


Insofar as what?



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:02 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: TheRedneck

When? Probably after law school. He's a former prosecutor. He's also, essentially, an investigator in these proceedings. Also, he *is* a US Representative, not was.

McConnell, on the other hand, is a Senator, and *should* be impartial during an impeachment trial, as all Senators should.

Hence my original point.


How would you get impartiality from the senators running for president against Trump?


How would you get impartiality from the senators aligned with trump that said they would not be impartial?


See? If you can't demand impartiality from those on "your" side, then how in the purple # can you demand it from anyone else?

I mean, if you're a hypocrite, then I guess it's okay.



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Ummm... if the Senate trial is analogous to a legal criminal trial, then the House impeachment is analogous to a grand jury indictment. A grand jury does not convict anyone, but they do indict so a trial can commence.


Insofar as what?

We will have to amend the US Constitution to begin recusing anyone duly elected to the Senate. I thought that was what we were discussing?

TheRedneck



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: Liquesence
a reply to: TheRedneck

When? Probably after law school. He's a former prosecutor. He's also, essentially, an investigator in these proceedings. Also, he *is* a US Representative, not was.

McConnell, on the other hand, is a Senator, and *should* be impartial during an impeachment trial, as all Senators should.

Hence my original point.


How would you get impartiality from the senators running for president against Trump?


How would you get impartiality from the senators aligned with trump that said they would not be impartial?


See? If you can't demand impartiality from those on "your" side, then how in the purple # can you demand it from anyone else?

I mean, if you're a hypocrite, then I guess it's okay.


But if the "head juror" won't even allow the process to be impartial and stated as much that that the process will be a pre-determined sham, I guess hypocrisy is ok if it fits your brand.



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:18 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

I'm not the one demanding impartiality, scooter.



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:20 PM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck

Not all criminal trials are predicated on a grand jury. In fact, many aren't.

And this is not a "criminal" trial per se.



We will have to amend the US Constitution to begin recusing anyone duly elected to the Senate. I thought that was what we were discussing?


Is it?



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:20 PM
link   

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: Liquesence

I'm not the one demanding impartiality, scooter.


You should be, libby.

If you actually care about the Constitution, as you claim.
edit on 14-12-2019 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 14 2019 @ 10:27 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar didn't joe biden admit to doing what they are accusing trump of doing without any shred of proof just asking





top topics



 
17
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join