Before the Jan 21 Start of the Senate Trial, Two Senators Must Be Forced To Recuse Themselves

[ancianita]

Who could legally force them, I don't know. But some legal entities should make this known to either John Roberts, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Pelosi and the House Managers.

Perhaps, after the trial gavel goes down, it would be in order under Senate Rules for a motion to be made by one of the Democratic senators to force the Senate to vote to have McConnell and Graham recuse themselves. Not sure that's possible, either.

Justification: Both have committed impeachable, even criminal, offenses.

THEY HAVE, BY THEIR OWN WORDS AND DEEDS, A PRIORI, CAUSE A MISTRIAL.

THUS, THEY POSE INHERENT THREAT TO PROTECTING AND DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION;
AS SUCH THEY POSE A THREAT TO THE NATION.


1. LINDSEY GRAHAM
2. MITCH MCCONNELL

Proof:

[Upthevibe]

1. Does John Roberts have ANY real and the operative word here is

"real" authority other than just being a figurehead? Maybe he can do something!!!

[ancianita]

3. Not under constitutional lanes, no. I believe it's too late to consult him 'til the trial begins.

He is the representative of the Judiciary Branch. As such, his job is Judiciary witness. A figurehead.

I can't see him participating unless the Senate votes to consult him as part of its trial rules. Which I haven't seen.

[Mike 03]

2. Maybe so. But I thought you might be thinking of Ron Johnson and Rob Portman

They seem to have been involved in the actual scandal.

[33taw]

4. Absolutely. I was going to write my Senator, but its Johnson.

[ancianita]

5. Of course they should be added, if you can provide linked evidence. Thanks!

[2naSalit]

6. I think

and I apologize for not having a source, Rep. Val Demmings, one of the House Managers, has called for MM to recuse himself for signing on to Lindsey's resolution a few weeks ago and/or statements he's made recently about his intentions for the trial.

[ancianita]

10. Right, Demings did. Here's her dot gov statement.

Still, I believe that now that she's a manager, some proxy in the House should get the whole House to send some request for a ruling, or use a joint resolution to force the issue in the Senate trial, right at the start of the trial.

https://demings.house.gov/media/press-releases/senator-mcconnell-must-recuse

[comradebillyboy]

7. Not going to happen...

[ancianita]

8. You absolutely know this because ...

[comradebillyboy]

9. Who's going to make them recuse? What possible motivation

is there for them to do it? What does their past behavior suggest about their integrity?

[ancianita]

11. Just because you don't know who can, doesn't mean no one can.

[comradebillyboy]

14. Well I don't believe in the tooth fairy either.

[ancianita]

15. And yet the gift is delivered. Sometimes being open to possibilities finds a legal path.

[MineralMan]

12. That will not happen.

Both will take the oath. Until they do, they're not under oath.

Both will ignore the oath, of course, as will most Republican Senators.

But neither will recuse themselves, nor will they be required to do that by anyone.

It's not a real possibility, so it is a waste of time.

[ancianita]

13. No official or unofficial call for them to recuse is a waste of time.

Just your opinion, I know.



My opinion is that taking a high road toward rule of law creates space for all to make more moral and constitutional strengthening decisions.

That drive is never a waste of time.

Calling Demings' statement a waste of time is a waste of time.

[onenote]

16. +1

[DeminPennswoods]

17. Rs can make a similar "recusal" argument against

Sanders, Warren, Klobuchar and Bennett - all currently running to oppose and defeat Trump. Then you have Harris and Booker who dropped out after the same endeavor.

[ancianita]

18. Statements against Trump in the 2020 election context are ethical, legal; statements FOR Trump

in the third impeachment trial in US History, HIS trial, are, at best, unethical.

R's can make a "similar" claim, but we know their love of false equivalency, don't we.