General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsHow can GOP senators serve as impeachment jurors when they're implicated
How can GOP senators serve as impeachment jurors when theyre implicated in Trumps misdeeds?
https://www.rawstory.com/2019/10/how-can-gop-senators-serve-as-impeachment-jurors-when-theyre-implicated-in-trumps-misdeeds/
...
Congressional Republicans have long since stopped defending Trump on the merits since shortly after the White House released a transcript of a July call between President Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Instead, theyve sought refuge in increasingly meaningless process arguments. So of course Pelosi agreeing to a formal vote on the rules of impeachment hasnt stopped Republican complaints about the process. The goalposts will shift once again. No matter what the Democrats agree to, Republicans will complain about procedural unfairness and also refuse to concede the inquiry is legitimate. But how much of Republicans unwillingness to hold Trump accountable for his self-dealing is because theyre in on it?
On Monday the Washington Post published an interview with a Ukrainian diplomat who claimed to have met with Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., this summer to discuss the baseless conspiracy theory promoted by President Trump that Ukrainian officials had interfered in the 2016 election on behalf of Hillary Clinton.
...
Beeyond his apparent involvement in Trumps Ukraine dealings, Johnson is alleged to have benefited from campaign money illegally funneled from Russia via shell corporations owned by the National Rifle Association, which helped him win his tight 2016 race in Wisconsin.
Political action committees for Republican Sens. Mitch McConnell, Marco Rubio and Lindsey Graham reportedly accepted $7.35 million in contributions from a Ukrainian-born oligarch with close ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin during the 2016 election. McConnell and Graham are co-sponsors of a new resolution condemning the House impeachment inquiry. At least 50 Senate Republicans, several of whom have refused to publicly comment on the growing Ukraine scandal citing a need to remain impartial for a likely Senate impeachment trial have already signed onto that bill. The resolution is currently paused in the Senate Rules Committee until the House votes on impeachment rules later this week.
As House Democrats investigation has rapidly unveiled ever more damaging material regarding Trumps Ukraine scandal, public support for impeachment has shot up. Reportedly nervous about his wall of defense in the Senate crumbling, the president recently hosted several GOP senators at the White House, including top Johnson, Graham, John Thune of South Dakota and John Kennedy of Louisiana, last week. A day earlier, Thune and Kennedy, had blocked a Democratic bill to provide funding for states to shore up election security. The next day, Sen. Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn., quietly blocked three election-security bills for the second time this year.
You know, its not a good sign if youre doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result, Blackburn said on the Senate floor late last week. She is among the Republican senators with close ties to a U.S.-sanctioned Russian politician who is accused of illegally channeling Russian funds through the NRA. Under Senate rules, any individual senator can block a vote on a bill
When Senate Republicans are not prematurely dismissing an impeachment inquiry on which they will probably have to render judgment, they continue to protect Trumps refusal to clamp down on potential election interference. If Republican charges of a kangaroo court are anything, they are a classic case of projection: How can Senate Republicans possibly serve as impartial jurors in a trial of the president, when they are implicated in the same pattern of political malfeasance?
Voltaire2
(13,033 posts)Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)as long as BARR is committing his crimes, never gonna happen.
As in while impeachment is political most GOP are guilty of crimes they will not be indicted for as long as the KGB agent BARR is in power.
Shrike47
(6,913 posts)The House Democrats need to lay out the evidence before the nation. The ultimate result will probably not be conviction but everybody will know what really happened.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)So siding with someone who has betrayed our nation is just being partisan?
sigh
Voltaire2
(13,033 posts)The process is a political process, not a judicial process. If impeached the Senate decides on conviction. They do so by a vote of the entire Senate.
Eliot Rosewater
(31,112 posts)Voltaire2
(13,033 posts)I'm sure that will convince them.
We knew going into this that the process is political and that it ends up in the republican controlled senate, or at least most of us here understood that, and that furthermore, the odds of the republican controlled senate voting to convict were not in our favor.
Voltaire2
(13,033 posts)The Senate would not be involved.
no_hypocrisy
(46,104 posts)they wouldn't b/c of the paralyzing fear that Trump will somehow discover their vote.
Iliyah
(25,111 posts)I would think that the senators who are implicated, should recuse themselves as jurors.
That would be proper. But then again, you have Criminal Barr not recusing himself, and I expect the senators also feel that they are above the law as well.
empedocles
(15,751 posts)SWBTATTReg
(22,124 posts)of it. Everyone of these scumbags needs to be censored and thrown out of the Senate (and others who illegally took overseas campaign money), along w/ rump (and thrown into jail, since they are ignoring Country vs. an overseas adversary who helped placed rump illegally into office).
dem4decades
(11,293 posts)Cause it kind of looks like they might be.
Shrike47
(6,913 posts)tavernier
(12,388 posts)of the film The Untouchables?
Baked Potato
(7,733 posts)Give those politicians what they crave... cash. Keeps them in their pocket for the future. The GOP senators are going to be put under the microscope soon. This fact may push them to pressure Trump to hit the road. They will obfuscate and deny until they are forced to act.
stopdiggin
(11,308 posts)that no one ever had serious expectations of a Senate voting to convict/remove? A couple of months back the whole discussion revolved around "making them vote" and "get them on record" .. as an exercise in exposing them to posterity (or to preserve the Constitution, or history, or some such). But nobody EVER said anything about winning.
(So .. while the article is of interest in re-capping some of the interlocking interests and influence .. it still begs the question of who every thought that the Senate was give an "impartial" hearing in the first place. And the answer is no one .. and never.)
RhodeIslandOne
(5,042 posts)Jurors shouldnt know the details of any case before hearing evidence, but we know that cant be on either side in any impeachment trial.
eppur_se_muova
(36,262 posts)They need to be emailed/faxed/tweeted that they should recuse themselves by voting 'present'.
Followed by an open letter in WaPo, for example.