Banjo,

At last you have recognised that Congress's decision was a forgone conclusion because of partisan voting, and that this largely happened because of the partisan nature of the impeachment process.

The point is that because the impeachment process to date has been so flawed, that any calls by Pelosi to run an impartial senate trial is both blatantly hypocritical and unlikely.

.

Dear Shadow Minister,

.

You wrote :

« At last you have recognised that Congress's decision was a forgone conclusion because of partisan voting, and that this largely happened because of the partisan nature of the impeachment process »
.

Not exactly. The United States Congress is the bicameral legislature of the federal government of the United States and consists of two chambers: the House of Representatives and the Senate.

The House of Representatives has voted only in favour of the indictment (impeachment) of Donald Trump. He has yet to be referred to the Senate for trial.

The Republicans all voted against indictment – as one man. But not all Democrats voted in favour of indictment. Three voted against it. What does that signify ? That it was a partisan vote ? On the Republican side, perhaps. On the Democrat side, perhaps also – though there is no tangible evidence of a partisan vote by the Democrats.

How can we decide for sure if it was partisan or not ? Is it possible for a vote to be unanimous or quasi-unanimous without it being partisan ?

Yes, it can. Even in politics, votes can be unanimous without being partisan, e.g., in 2003, George W. Bush signed the Prison Rape Elimination Act, passed with unanimous “bipartisan” support. So if it is not the unanimity or quasi-unanimity of the vote that distinguishes partisanship (“partisanism” in the US), then what does ?

For the OED, the adjective “partisan” means “prejudiced in favour of a particular cause”. The Merriam-Webster adds : “… if you're accused of being too partisan, or of practicing partisan politics, it means you're mainly interested in boosting your own party and attacking the other one”.

In other words, expression of “political prejudice” can reveal partisan behaviour – in this case, partisan voting.

.

(Continued …)

.

.

(Continued …)

.

This is clearly the case in the voting intentions of the Republicans in the up-coming Senate trial. The Senate Majority Leader, Mitch McConnell, declared that Trump will be acquitted by the Republican-led Senate: "We will have a largely partisan outcome", he said and added : « I'm not an impartial juror. This is a political process. There is not anything judicial about it. Impeachment is a political decision ».

There was no such declaration on the part of the Democrats in relation to the House inquiry vote – nor in relation to the up-coming Senate vote.

However, it’s not difficult to imagine that the Democrat vote in the House (where they hold a comfortable majority), in favour of indictment, was, perhaps, partly in reaction to the fact that Trump withheld documentary evidence and prevented key witnesses from testifying at the inquiry. This could only have had a negative effect on even the most impartial of voters.

Please correct me if I am wrong, Shadow Minister, but I honestly don’t think there is any tangible evidence of partisan voting by the Democrats – which, of course, does not mean that there wasn’t any, but simply that there is no evidence of it.

.

Banjo,

When roughly 97% of democrats voted for the impeachment and 100% of republicans voted against it is about as partisan as one can get on both sides, and was a process run by the dems for the dems only and anyone claiming otherwise is delusional.

The chances of the impeachment getting through the senate even with a simple majority is slim. The process has been so badly handled by the democrats that no sensible person would touch it with a barge pole.

.

Dear Shadow Minister,

.

As I explained in my previous post, a unanimous vote in Congress, e.g., the Prison Rape Elimination Act, passed with unanimous “bipartisan” support in 2003, does not necessarily signify that it is a partisan vote.

You choose to ignore that and stick to your convictions. That’s fine with me.

However, there’s obviously no point in continuing this discussion.

Until we meet again, on some other thread of mutual interest …

.

Banjo,

I suggest you look up the definition of partisan, I think you will find the impeachment vote a textbook case.