This line of argument really bugs me. Not only does it violate the presumption of innocence, but the founders anticipated this very conflict and solved it by vesting the power to impeach in the House and Senate. There will be other presidents than Trump.https://twitter.com/tribelaw/status/1012467963486752785 …
I'm not making that argument, either. I agree with you that Senators have power here that they should use.
-
-
I think I see your point, then. I mean in a just system any nominee would recuse themselves from cases where their partiality could be in question, but there is also a lot of reasons to doubt that would happen so an argument could be made for preventing the conflict to begin with
-
The whole Scalia/Garland thing did reveal bugs in the system that need to be patched. We need an amendment to do something like require a vote in x days/months (other stuff, too, but just talking about the direct consequences of Garland here).
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.