• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.
  3. Please note there is a new rule regarding the posting of videos. It reads, "Post a summary of the videos you post . An exception can be made for music videos.". Unless you are simply sharing music, please post a summary, or the gist, of the video you wish to share.

Nadler’s appearance of hypocrisy

Discussion in 'American Politics' started by hislegacy, Dec 8, 2019.

  1. hislegacy

    hislegacy This is me.

    United States
    The last time this committee considered impeaching a president in 1998, Democratic leaders, including Chairman Nadler, insisted the president deserves the presumption of innocence, the right to confront witnesses, and “due process quadrupled.”

    Have Democrats lived up to that standard? Not even close. Today marks the first time the president’s lawyers have been invited to participate, but, rather than asking questions of fact witnesses, the president’s counsel gets to question law professors. I don’t think that meets Democrats’ standard of “due process quadrupled.”
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. Albion

    Albion Facilitator

    Did you catch the latest gimmick charge being used against the president by Nadler? It's #6 or something like that since just last week.

    He said that the president must be impeached because he thinks himself a "monarch" instead of a democratically elected leader. This charge, creative as it is absurd, has a purpose. We have heard it said that the purpose behind the impeachment is to damage the reputation of the president, thus helping the Democrats in the upcoming election. Nadler appeared to verify that thinking during his nationally televised interview today.
  3. whatbogsends

    whatbogsends Senior Veteran

    And, surprise, surprise, Republicans have done the same thing.

    Politicians changing their stances based on the party of the people involved? Color me shocked.

    Have Republicans held to their standards they set during Clinton's impeachment? Not even close.

    Lindsey Graham during Clinton's impeachment:

    “You don’t even have to be convicted of a crime to lose your job (as president) in this constitutional republic if this body determines your conduct as a public official is clearly out of bounds in your role, because impeachment is not about punishment,” he said. “Impeachment is about cleansing the office. Impeachment is about restoring honor and integrity to the office.”

  4. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats Christ is born!

    United States
    There is no reason to deny Donald Trump MUST be impeached for what everyone KNOWS HE DID.
  5. Bobber

    Bobber Well-Known Member

    Sure you don't want to dial that back? I'd suggest it's extremely presumptuous for you to claim YOU KNOW what everyone believes which according to you is something wrong.
  6. ChristianForCats

    ChristianForCats Christ is born!

    United States
    It is obvious the Republicans have been trying to prevent the Democrats from getting information proving guilt by ignoring subpoenas and spouting lies. If they were really innocent, they would want to testify and hand over all of the documents Democrats subpoenaed to prove no wrongdoing occured. In addition, new reports have been spilling out about the same people who argue Trump did nothing wrong being involved themselves.
  7. Belk

    Belk Senior Member Supporter


    What exactly is a "fact witness"? How do they differ from a regular old witness?
  8. iluvatar5150

    iluvatar5150 Well-Known Member

    United States
    This is a pretty absurd comparison. In the Clinton impeachment, the House didn't have much in the way of hearings since Ken Starr did all the leg work. In the Senate, the witness testimony consisted of exerpts of pre-recorded depositions.

    Impeachment of Bill Clinton - Wikipedia

    Trump hasn't been denied any due process.
  9. Mountainmanbob

    Mountainmanbob Goat Whisperer Supporter

    United States
    Good luck with that.
    Guess it's all they got?