.........especially since there were no "high crimes or misdemeanors" committed; it would be really hard to sway any Republican senators (except the one with an axe to grind) to convict on what was really just a partisan political stunt. Of course, few would know that based on the vast majority of the "main stream" media's content.
Life moves on...
Well I disagree. Respectfully. I believe he was guilty of both articles of impeachment. The second one (obstruction of congress) I think, even though he is guilty, we can dismiss as not meeting
the standard of a high crime since almost every president tries at one time or another to obstruct congress. Sometimes I wish I could obstruct congress. I don't see how anyone doesn't think he is guilty
of the first count of abuse of power. I can see how some might think that what he did was not severe enough to meet "High Crimes" but clearly his self serving goal of trying to get the Ukrainians to
investigate Joe Biden's son before they would receive military aid shouldn't be dismissed out of hand as not meeting the standard of a misdemeanor. I think we all understand that it really wasn't out
of character to do that. It's probably been the way he has done business his whole life, and in the business world it would be seen as good business. I'm sure Walmart employs similar "quid pro quo" tactics
of playing other businesses off of each other to get lower supply prices. So does what he definitely did do meet the standard of a misdemeanor? ..well I can see debate about that as opposed to just dismissing it out of hand as a hoax or political stunt. I really wish religion was kept out of politics, but when one party seems to be courting, and is supported by, religious groups, it seems very hypocritical of them to come down so harshly on the one senator of their party that went across party lines for what he said was because of an oath he took before god.
As for political parties, I wish they were not allowed at the U.S. representative level. I see Congress as being representative of the people, as opposed to the senate where we expect a level of statesmanship and experience and thoughtfulness to moderate whatever comes out of Congress. Thus the quick 2 year turn around for Congress and the 6 year election cycle for Senators. Currently (I guess) we pick our Congress person based on which party they're in and expect them to always vote that way. I'd prefer if they constantly checked with us about every little item that comes before them so that they truly represented their district. They should start checking with us right after they are elected. Mine however always sends out questionnaires right before an election. Sure most things probably would go along party lines (that is the chosen party of most of the people in the district), and some things would be more knee-jerk reactions of the people. There might just be a few surprises however, and there would be more involvement of the people in their government if they heard from their representative once a week or every couple of weeks about what's coming up for a vote, and in return providing their feedback. The representative's main job should be to find out what we want and then relay that to congress through the voting and bill writing process. They should be a conduit of us only. Once they do that well for a few terms then we can see if we want to make them Senators someday.
Ok, I'm done..off to the Arena with the lot of you.
130 131 pages of "What makes me crazy and annoyed". We sure sure are an irritated group of crazy grumpy ol' farts
. (respectfully speaking
)
