@NickN I thought I would create this thread in Outside Beltway as it has evolved beyond just Trump’s impeachment trial. Also, rather than include all the posts I have chosen to include only NickN’s last post and my response.
NickN’s post was:
"1a. + 3. Sure a Trump plea for innocence. Still confusing to me, taking delays out of the equation for a moment, can you shed some light on how you feel in the House inquiry the Dems were justified in skipping standard protocol of even attempting to seeking court orders to force witnesses in? Please include how appreciating any sitting President is surely to invoke executive privilege fits in too recognizing standard practice including Nixon and Clinton prior.
And now on to “ expected” delays with court appeals. Election year coming would of caused chain reaction to force much quicker turnaround. Add proof on how Supreme Court Chief Justice had to quickly drop his afternoon schedule to preside over Senate trial. Plus taking a month to deliver articles. Will you concede that at least Dems made it clear to R-Senators of morse code being telegraphed was political agenda (as clearly no immenient threat keeping POTUS in office)?
2. Your choice word of “some” sparked me to add pressure. Enuf said there.
3. Three Dem Senators, including Sanders and Warren on the far left, none seem to be among the Parties preferred choice to headline of their ticket. Agree?
4. If Bolton was allowed to testify in either inquiry or results do you feel even damaging 1st hand testimony changes materially the end result? Cite one or two theoretical examples if you do.
Q2 According to Oxford dictionary, is Romney a textbook example of a hypocrite in your book? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Q3 Conclusion: Agree Nixon a goner, would of been removed. Difference than from now in Trump being absolutely partisan affairs x 2 Houses. Even Clinton plea bargain including like 11 felonies counts had at least decent amt of bi-partisan support in both Chambers. Neither Clinton or Trump even close to real danger of being removed. Wisdom in why U.S. Founding Fathers set it up for super majority in impeachment still standing the test of time is impressive from my viewpoint. How Is impeachment different in Australia?
P.S. Being a liberal, surprised to hear you are unaware extreme political divide exists here. Imagine how the mostly left press sang the praises of Obama for 8 straight years preceding Trump. Even DJT being polled on Election Day is considered to be greatest underdog in American history to win. How does your left movement compare to Israel? Their left press is more brutal than U.S…"
Let me start with saying that as an Aussie I totally reject the tag of Liberal. I am left of centre. What executive privilege did D Trump apply with respect to this? The reality is that there is little doubt trying to ensure that certain witnesses appear before the House of Reps would have meant a significant delay.
I don’t think that one can extrapolate the SC Justice presiding over the Senate trail to an expedited SC hearing for witnesses to appear before the House of Reps. Quite clearly impeachment of a president is implicitly a political practice given the roles of the House of Reps and Senate. From my perspective taking a month to deliver the articles of impeachment to the Senate is neither here nor there especially given the time of year (Christmas holidays). The use of hyperbole is undoubtedly very much a device used by politicians no matter what their politics.
I would not describe either Warren or Sanders as far left. Notwithstanding that it is not unusual that supporters of a political party may not all support a single candidate (for president). I am sure that there were/are some Republican supporters who do not have Trump as their preferred candidate. I expect that some of those whom may have sat out the presidential election or written in another candidate’s name in 2016 will vote for the Democrat candidate in 2020. Who do you think are the DP’s preferred choices?
Given the R Senators’ action in not voting for witnesses it is highly unlikely 20 R Senators would have voted guilty under most circumstances. As I said previously it was a missed opportunity for the Trump to speak to Independents that it was only ever a witch hunt if first hand witnesses had confirmed Trump’s claims. To me there is no sane, rational, reasonable explanation of Trump’s decision not to allow those first hand witnesses to appear that is favourable to Trump.
Q2. I am not trying to be coy but in the context of the trial why do you say Romney is a hypocrite?
Q3. Obviously there has been a very limited number of impeachments of USA presidents. And I obviously don’t have an exhaustive knowledge of all the actions of all USA presidents, so it is difficult to attest to whether requiring 67 senators is a bar too high or not. In this context Australia doesn’t have an impeachment process as such. In order to take action to replace a Prime Minister there are two legal ways of doing it other than through a general election.
(i) The PM’s party’s politicians could move a spill motion which if successful would replace the PM.
(ii) The lower house (House of Reps) could have a motion of no confidence moved and if successful the PM would be required to resign and the opposition would have a chance to prove they have the confidence of the House of Reps. If they are successful the opposition leader would become PM and there would be a change of government. If the opposition can’t show they have the confidence of the House of Reps, there would be a general election.
Note we don’t have fixed terms in our Federal parliament. It is up to the PM to determine when a general election is held notwithstanding that our maximum term is 3 years for our Federal government.
PS. I am not sure why you think I was not aware of the extreme partisanship of the political climate over in the USA. I am certainly aware of it. Israeli politics is not something I have taken a particularly keen interest in so I will comment on the ALP (Australian Labor Party) here in Australia. The ALP was formed by trade unionists. It is a centre-left party with right, centre and left factions. Over the past 50+ years it has moved to the right. I would say that the current Greens Party would occupy the same political space as the Whitlam Labor Government of 1972-75. With respect to Australia’s press for all state capitals (except my state capital of Perth, Western Australia) the top selling newspaper is a Murdoch newspaper that could not be described as a left of centre newspaper.