this post was submitted on 12 Aug 2023
72 points (100.0% liked)

Politics

10162 readers
18 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.


Guidelines for submissions:

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.


Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Vos said Protasiewicz would likely be violating the oath of office if she doesn't recuse herself from cases involving maps she called 'rigged.'

top 7 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 73 points 1 year ago (2 children)

That's a clever line of attack, but having an opinion does not constitute a conflict of interest. Otherwise there would be a whole shit-ton of recusal happening every day.

A conflict of interest usually involves some form of monetary compensation or other fiscal benefit.

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Right? This is just a wacky line of thought. 99% of cases are "prejudged" that's why we have a trial process with arguments and counter-arguments. To show evidence and convince the judges of your opinions.

Sad that impeachment is continuing to be wielded as a weapon more and more. It should be reserved for extreme situations. Not just because you want an excuse to get rid of your opponent

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It was kind of inevitable, unfortunately. After we impeach one of them for even legitimate wrongdoing, if they do not counter-impeach us, they lose perceived legitimacy, which weakens them.

They had no other strategically sound moves, when you consider their goal of hanging onto power regardless of the wishes of the voting public.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago

Yep. Because obstruction is their only policy.

[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You think the #fascist #GOP cares about that? All that matters to those #fascists is they have the numbers to remove her from the bench.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 year ago

I'm discussing the specific choice of what rhetoric they decide to use, not why they are using it. Why they are using it is fairly obvious at this point.

There are many different lines, arguments, whatever that could be employed, though. By paying attention to which ones are specifically chosen, you can learn more about their target audience, which is larger than simply fans of a white, ultra-nationalist ethno-state. Hence their need to continue to use rationalizations like this, instead of being forthright about their intentions.

This one in particular surprised me, as I didn't foresee it. They're usually more predictable than that.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 1 year ago

They probably will go through with impeachment if she does not recuse herself. They know that they need to rig the voting process in order to win elections because at their core the Republican party is evil.