Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

986racer

(31 posts) Sat Feb 13, 2021, 06:43 PM Feb 2021

If Mitch felt that strongly, he shouldn't have voted at all... [View all]

He should have not voted at all. The vote to rule the trial constitutional already occurred.

There is no "not guilty because of constitutional reasons". It's either guilty or non-guilty. To truly object the process, then sit out completely.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

3 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Mitch felt that strongly, he shouldn't have voted at all... [View all] 986racer Feb 2021 OP

I thought there might have been a few Senators that would have voted "present". Or not shown up OAITW r.2.0 Feb 2021 #1

His calculus is simple... 986racer Feb 2021 #3

Mitch set this up. He waited for dump to leave office so he could give cover to all of them onecaliberal Feb 2021 #2