December 18, 2019
Oath of Impeachment
Timothy Birdnow
On Facebook a group called Call to Activism posted about how the Senators are required to take an oath before hearing the impeachment case, and how McConnell and Lindsay Graham should recuse themselves since they have prejudged the case. I commented:
A commenter on this post bemoaned the "lack of fairness" of the GOP. I posted:
In case you missed it, the Democrats swore they would impeach Donald Trump almost from the day he won the election. What kind of grand jury were the Democrats running?
They never did produce a crime. They tried to get Trump on "quid pro quo" and bribery, but had to give that up because they had zero evidence. So they have gone with the most nebulous charges they could muster.
And do you remember when the Democrats were trying to find a way to flip Electors in the Electoral College? The Democrats refused to accept Trump's election. And from the beginning there were people in the party who were calling for Trump's impeachment. Al Green was demanding Trump be impeached in May of 2017, for example. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/05/17/texas-rep-al-green-calls-president-trumps-impeachment-house-floor/101786744/ and articles were filed against Trump by July of that year. There was no evidence then of wrongdoing - just the Mueller probe, which has since failed to find any evidence against Mr. Trump. https://www.npr.org/2019/12/17/788397365/impeachment-timeline-from-early-calls-to-a-full-house-vote
The accusations against Trump have been endless and ever-changing; Russian collusion, bribery, obstruction of justice, etc. and yet we come down to THIS. It's interesting to note that Adam Schiff, the Torquemada of impeachment, has strong ties to the Ukraine https://www.foxnews.com/politics/adam-schiffs-own-ukraine-connection-comes-under-scrutiny And the Ukrainians were not only involved with Biden's son, and Mr. Biden himself, but also with Hillary Clinton https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-and-ukraine-11569881729 Strange.
Also, the Democrats have tried to impeach every Republican president since Nixon - except Ford, who was the walking dead and not worth going after. So, why should anyone take any of this crap seriously?
The Democrats didn't take Clinton's impeachment seriously, even though he perjured himself in Federal court and tampered with witnesses (and was convicted by one of his own former law students in an Arkansas court). So why should the GOP give one flying frig to any of this?
On Facebook a group called Call to Activism posted about how the Senators are required to take an oath before hearing the impeachment case, and how McConnell and Lindsay Graham should recuse themselves since they have prejudged the case. I commented:
The Constitution does not say what that oath entails. Article One Section Three states
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present"
What oath are the Senators swearing? One must ask, since there were nary a single Democrat who voted guilty when Bill Clinton was impeached.
There were two articles against Clinton, one for perjury and the other obstruction of justice. Mr. Clinton would be found guilty of these crimes IN A COURT OF LAW after his impeachment.
This was not an "impeachment over sex" but over Clinton's lying in Federal court and attempting to tamper with a witness (Monica Lewisnsky) as well as obstruct the investigation.
So where was the fidelity to the oath then? Strange how now they have rediscovered it.
"The Senate shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments. When sitting for that Purpose, they shall be on Oath or Affirmation. When the President of the United States is tried, the Chief Justice shall preside: And no Person shall be convicted without the Concurrence of two thirds of the Members present"
What oath are the Senators swearing? One must ask, since there were nary a single Democrat who voted guilty when Bill Clinton was impeached.
There were two articles against Clinton, one for perjury and the other obstruction of justice. Mr. Clinton would be found guilty of these crimes IN A COURT OF LAW after his impeachment.
This was not an "impeachment over sex" but over Clinton's lying in Federal court and attempting to tamper with a witness (Monica Lewisnsky) as well as obstruct the investigation.
So where was the fidelity to the oath then? Strange how now they have rediscovered it.
A commenter on this post bemoaned the "lack of fairness" of the GOP. I posted:
In case you missed it, the Democrats swore they would impeach Donald Trump almost from the day he won the election. What kind of grand jury were the Democrats running?
They never did produce a crime. They tried to get Trump on "quid pro quo" and bribery, but had to give that up because they had zero evidence. So they have gone with the most nebulous charges they could muster.
And do you remember when the Democrats were trying to find a way to flip Electors in the Electoral College? The Democrats refused to accept Trump's election. And from the beginning there were people in the party who were calling for Trump's impeachment. Al Green was demanding Trump be impeached in May of 2017, for example. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/05/17/texas-rep-al-green-calls-president-trumps-impeachment-house-floor/101786744/ and articles were filed against Trump by July of that year. There was no evidence then of wrongdoing - just the Mueller probe, which has since failed to find any evidence against Mr. Trump. https://www.npr.org/2019/12/17/788397365/impeachment-timeline-from-early-calls-to-a-full-house-vote
The accusations against Trump have been endless and ever-changing; Russian collusion, bribery, obstruction of justice, etc. and yet we come down to THIS. It's interesting to note that Adam Schiff, the Torquemada of impeachment, has strong ties to the Ukraine https://www.foxnews.com/politics/adam-schiffs-own-ukraine-connection-comes-under-scrutiny And the Ukrainians were not only involved with Biden's son, and Mr. Biden himself, but also with Hillary Clinton https://www.wsj.com/articles/hillary-clinton-and-ukraine-11569881729 Strange.
Also, the Democrats have tried to impeach every Republican president since Nixon - except Ford, who was the walking dead and not worth going after. So, why should anyone take any of this crap seriously?
The Democrats didn't take Clinton's impeachment seriously, even though he perjured himself in Federal court and tampered with witnesses (and was convicted by one of his own former law students in an Arkansas court). So why should the GOP give one flying frig to any of this?
Posted by: Timothy Birdnow at
09:39 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 535 words, total size 4 kb.
1
Such sites are important because they provide a large dose of useful information ... Termite Treatment Orlando
Posted by: Carlton Newman at January 01, 2023 02:57 AM (BQrh3)
2
I also wrote an article on a similar subject will find it at write what you think. Tembusu Grand
Posted by: Cameron Carlson at February 14, 2023 11:29 PM (czL8n)
3
I prefer merely excellent resources - you will see these people in: The Continuum
Posted by: Cameron Carlson at February 14, 2023 11:31 PM (czL8n)
4
Hi there, I discovered your blog per Google bit searching for such kinda educational advise moreover your inform beholds very remarkable for me. Buy oxycontin
Posted by: Cameron Carlson at February 17, 2023 08:05 AM (3cvub)
5
You ought to basically fantastic not to mention solid advice, which means notice: wedding dresses in Dallas
Posted by: Jan Aguilar at March 16, 2023 08:08 AM (xXmsf)
26kb generated in CPU 0.1802, elapsed 0.3866 seconds.
37 queries taking 0.3734 seconds, 190 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
37 queries taking 0.3734 seconds, 190 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
