Posted on 12/19/2019 6:58:04 AM PST by White MAGA Man
Ruth Bader Ginsburg spoke with the BBC this week about the upcoming impeachment trial in the US Senate.
During her questioning Justice Ginsburg suggested that US Senators could be disqualified from the proceedings if they are not impartial.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Disqualified by who exactly?
L
Just where in the Senate rules or even in some obscure passage in the CFR is this ever stated? The proceedings themselves may have to be impartial- meaning applied without consideration of political leanings. The senators themselves can be partial. Remember they are acting as both jury and judge. Just as a trial judge can decide what testimony, evidence,witnesses are to be called so may the Senate. In no way must they agree to have such foisted upon them by the House.
She’s right. Those Dim senators are FAR FROM IMPARTIAL.
Incidentally, Ruthie DOES have a mirror, she DOES NOT have a reflection.
She’s haunting us even though she’s alive or is she? Could she just be an apparition?
Did anyone check to see if that statement was her or some recorded device.
This tells me that she is on the verge of room temperature and may expire before the 2020 election.
Impeachment was to stop Trump from nominating her successor.
Hear that Chuckie?
I think this is aimed at senators who say they will work closely with Trump and the White House lawyers, saying that their participation may be curtailed by a court-ordred recusal.
I think this is a sign that RBG is slipping into dementia. SCJ’s know that mouthing off can taint any judgements they may preside over and also taint the SC. They are and should be rare. While these statements may inspire the radical left today, it is counterproductive to their own cause in the long term. She may be dirt napping soon.
When she dies there will be general rejoicing.
That gave me a chuckle. She believes that impartiality could disqualify a senator but not a Supreme Court judge.
You mean no democrat senators can take part?
I’d say she’s senile, but this is just her standard evil abuse of authority. She’s corrupt.
Disqualified by whom, and under what authority? And who decides who is - or is not - “impartial,” and what are the criteria? I don’t think Ruth thought about this very deeply.
Ginsberg’s reasoning can be applied to Warren, Klobuchar and Sanders, who would be voting against a political rival and arguably in their own interest
Thank You Ruthie
Wasn’t it Obama that threatened calling a rogue house?
Hopefully she will give the US the best Christmas present ever and die soon.
By “impartial,” she means has expressed a desire to remove Trump since January, 2017.
Using her reasoning the House Dems should have been recused from voting
She broke all of them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.