A) no it’s not illegal, because the rules of evidence do not apply because this isn’t a real trial.
B) we haven’t had a functioning DoJ in this country for generations - nobody is getting arrested for shit.
I'm not paying attention to the current theater show, but from what I recall in the last impeachment the House did not require following rules of evidence, because each branch can set their own rules. In the Senate I'm not sure what power they have to choose rules, but doubt they did have the power to require normal rules of evidence and also doubt they have a majority with motivation to do so.
It would be nice if you could do something like allow a judge to ask lawyers questions regarding the evidence, and make them put in a statement on the record that says something was omitted, and so on. But in the last trial they failed to go forward with getting Schiff to testify under oath. Basically it's open season for lies, there is no active mechanism to cross check besides having the public listen carefully before believing videos. This is half on Democrats for being dishonest pigs and half on the public for being gullible pigs.
Amazingly, no. There is great leniency to say whatever you like (and, unlike in public, have zero liability for doing so) when speaking in the Congress/Senate.
A) no it’s not illegal, because the rules of evidence do not apply because this isn’t a real trial. B) we haven’t had a functioning DoJ in this country for generations - nobody is getting arrested for shit.
FTFY
I was talking about this case specifically. But yes, you are 100% correct.
I'm not paying attention to the current theater show, but from what I recall in the last impeachment the House did not require following rules of evidence, because each branch can set their own rules. In the Senate I'm not sure what power they have to choose rules, but doubt they did have the power to require normal rules of evidence and also doubt they have a majority with motivation to do so.
It would be nice if you could do something like allow a judge to ask lawyers questions regarding the evidence, and make them put in a statement on the record that says something was omitted, and so on. But in the last trial they failed to go forward with getting Schiff to testify under oath. Basically it's open season for lies, there is no active mechanism to cross check besides having the public listen carefully before believing videos. This is half on Democrats for being dishonest pigs and half on the public for being gullible pigs.
Does the Senate not have a 'you must not lie' rule, as is in use in parliaments in democracies?
Amazingly, no. There is great leniency to say whatever you like (and, unlike in public, have zero liability for doing so) when speaking in the Congress/Senate.
Congress is immune to any form of legal prosecution from ‘misleading or incomplete’ statements. Censure and removal are about it.
Technically, it violates congressional rules.
But yes, not a "crime."
This is a kangaroo court, and laws dont apply. Its spin & deception vs public opinion