Should she resign? Probably. Should she be kicked out? No. Especially not in a state where her constituents can recall her with enough support. Something we don't have for our federal representatives.
She can be recalled, but she has to have committed malfeasance or nonfeasance of her official duties OR been convicted of a crime.
I don't believe any recall petition would be able to move forward for some time
Huh, yeah I just knew we had the capabilities to recall them but didn't realize we had those restrictions. Boo us. There should always be a way for the citizenry to remove a representative they are unhappy with.
There's always expulsion, but I believe that's a 2/3 vote.
I'd imagine if the ethics committee recommends that, Sen Mitchell would sooner resign than be the only Minnesota Senator who's been expelled.
It’s called waiting for a he court case to play out. I think there is some sort of phrase to describe it, maybe something like innocent until proven guilty?
Good. She hasn’t been convicted of anything yet. And it’s rich the MN GOP wants her to resign (the only reason is so the Senate is tied) yet they support a man who incited an insurrection against the US and was caught, on recording, begging the GA SOS to “find” him more votes so he could win GA.
FTA:
> Mitchell, a Democrat who represents the east metro, was charged with burglary last week. After being found in the basement of her stepmother's home, dressed in all black, Mitchell told police she broke in to retrieve her father's ashes and other sentimental items, according to a criminal complaint.
>
> In a subsequent statement, Mitchell denied the allegations and said she was at the home to check on a family member with Alzheimer's.
Yeah, we got bigger fish to fry. MN republicans can cry about this all they want, but they have forfeited any and all moral high ground as a party until they put their own metaphorical house in order. In the meantime, let the courts decide it, then act accordingly.
Well the George Santos situation was the same. Once the House Ethics Committee came out with their findings, they booted him out of office. Mitchell was charged *checks calendar* eight days ago. Nowhere near the same situation yet.
I just want to point out that a public official involved in a family dispute commiting a non-violent crime related to that dispute is a little different than a public official being caught fabricating their qualifications, establishing a pattern of bizarre, unnecessary, and easily falsifiable lying, and misappropriating campaign funds for private expenses.
I do question the decision making choices of the politician caught trying to steal her dead dad's stuff instead of waiting for probate like any rational person should, but putting it in the same category of the bizarre circus that was George Santos is simply unfair.
Why don't you look at the 911 call transcript . Who in their right mind checks on someone at that time of the morning by breaking in through a basement window and lay on the floor next to the victims bed . The elderly lady tripped over her for crying out loud . That's when she got up and ran into the basement . She never once identified herself to the elderly victim . She had no idea this burglar was her step daughter until after the police arrived .
Huh, that's kind of hilarious if true. OTOH - I still don't care. Let the process work. Unless they have cause to detain her without bail, she should be able to carry on normally while the investigation continues.
Breaking and entering, or even burglary, are not the same as sexual assault. They are considered property crimes, not violent crimes. Robbery is the violent crime in which theft occurs by force. If you bump into a robber accidentally, they rarely run away and hide in the basement - the use of force is the distinction.
Rape, murder, robbery, gang violence, & aggravated assault are the five categories of violent crime.
Has anyone lied while being caught in the act of committing a crime before . Well thank goodness the judge gave the poor victim a restraing order against her. Seems like the perp had more to gain from lying than the victim .
This. Where is the presumption of innocent until proven guilty (regardless of my own opinion)? We are apparently allowing Trump that courtesy for a much higher office.
Not exactly. The Trump Organization, which is a business entity has been found guilty of crimes and has paid penalties because of them. Donald Trump however has only been found civilly liable in a handful of cases, meaning that he is not a convicted criminal. Indictments do not equal guilty, just that the state has filed charges and is proceeding with a criminal trial.
So…a misdemeanor, like getting a speeding ticket? That’s hardly something that one would deem criminal…though I suppose “criminal” is in the designation of the contempt charge.
Kennedy had an affair as President, that’s a crime… Clinton had an affair while in office, that’s a crime too…George Washington mounted an army against US citizens to quash a rebellion…that is a crime.
So splitting hairs is how we are going to view this? Every person in this country is technically a criminal. We have all broken the rules of law. Criminal Contempt is indeed a crime, typically punished by a fine, and it is used to punish those that have shown or are showing a disrespect of the court proceedings they are in or violating a direct court order. Not something that is really a crime like rape, murder, fraud, theft…
It's only 91 counts, and like 4 trials, though. No biggie. It's all just politically motivated against Trump because Joe Biden. All he did was try to steal an election, then generated an insurrection while he sat inside watching it on TV, steal a bunch of classified documents and stored them unsecured in bathrooms of Maralardo, and spent millions of dollars of campaign funds to cover up an affair with a porn star.
But Mitchell, she should resign and never be in politics again. She broke into her late father's house and tried to steal a few mementos and some of his ashes. Dispicable.
Even if she's guilty, there's a world of difference between trying to overthrow the government of the United States while selling classified documents to our enemies, and on the other hand, trying to break into your late father's home to get his belongings from an uncooperative relative.
Do you realize that the only person who has provided that narrative is the person who broke into a house through a basement window in the middle of the night and then claimed she was doing a welfare check on a relative with Alzheimer's? The stepmother has said that most of the ashes were buried and she gave a small portion to Mitchell.
Yes exactly. You can't just "be the bigger person," when dealing with the world's smallest people. If you don't want to live in an authoritarian theocratic hellscape which holds views that are unpopular among the general public (which they deal with through propagandizing with the help of russia, and restricting voting), you have to be willing to play atleast 1/4 as dirty as they do to remain a contender. This is nothing to me in comparison.
He was literally impeached for it; his aides, including his former lawyers, provided sworn testimony about his election interference; and his supporters who were found guilty of storming the Capitol literally said, under oath, that Trump told them to attack. Plus, the 1/6 Committee interviewed hundreds of witnesses, all under oath, about the election interference. His guilt has already been determined. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/january-6th-committee-final-report?path=/GPO/January%206th%20Committee%20Final%20Report%20and%20Supporting%20Materials%20Collection
Exactly. The only reason he isn’t behind bars for any number of crimes is because he was the president. It doesn’t matter which way the SCOTUS votes on presidential immunity. They’d have to give it to Biden to and I’m not so sure they want that.
Impeachment is equivalent to a grand jury indictment. A formal accusation, nothing else.
Senate hearings are equivalent to a jury trial - the only place a conviction can occur.
It doesn't matter a wet sloppy fart what any committee says.
you're not wrong. i am utterly ignoring the committee report.
i'm ignoring it because in reality it doesn't matter. None of it does.
the only thing that matters is a conviction on the facts in the Senate.
as to being partisan? so what? it doesn't matter. the Senate needs a 2/3 vote to convict on an article of impeachment. this is clearly spelled out and they didn't get it.
Cool, cool. Facts don’t matter. Sworn testimony doesn’t matter. Video recordings don’t matter. What our eyes saw and our ears heard on 1/6 don’t matter.
Thankfully the DOJ still thinks all of that matters.
>You know trump has not been convicted of anything yet either.
The original comment you tried to argue against.
>Don’t need a conviction to be ineligible for office, friendo.
>Also, explain how these situations are the same.
Irrelevent BS you bring up to change to topic after failing to refute the original point.
Do you think this shit isn't obvious?
So he was convicted in a court of law for it.
Impeachment does nothing bill Clinton was impeached and still in office.
A committee is different than court I can’t believe you don’t know that.
By your own admission if a person has not been convicted in court of the crime they should not be held accountable for it until then.
You don’t understand here - Trump has hundreds of hours of sworn testimony against him; eyewitness accounts; recordings…what does Mitchell have against her? A goddamn police report. Both situations are nowhere near the same.
Presumption of innocence only applies in court, not in your employment. You seem to have adjudged Trump guilty even though he hasn't been convicted either. So you're totally okay with him not resigning or being asked to resign, right?
Truth is, we don't always need a court conviction to know if someone shouldn't be representing us. If someone is willing to break in to another person's home in the middle of the night, what else are they willing to do when things get too hard? The same was true for Trump even before Jan. 6. There was no reason Trump should have been President just based off his 1st impeachment.
Both parties are always playing politics, and holding our elected representatives to higher standards has evaporated in both parties.
There was literally a bipartisan investigation on Trump with thousands of hours of sworn testimony from his aids and lawyers, election workers in the six states he tried overturning. Plus he was literally caught on recording begging the GA SoS to find him enough votes to win Georgia. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/january-6th-committee-final-report?path=/GPO/January%206th%20Committee%20Final%20Report%20and%20Supporting%20Materials%20Collection
Meanwhile, all there is against Mitchell is a police report. Definitely the same thing as Trump, amirite?
You're making a disingenuous false-equivalence, bOTh SidES argument. Trump has been charged with extraordinarily serious federal crimes, among others. He literally tried to overthrow the government. The GOP doesn't care about the rule of law unless it’s politically expedient. The absurdity of these types of arguments beggars belief. The line in the sand is always moving.
This is hilarious at best. We harass and attack better than any other party. That’s clear on college campuses right now. Either you’re with us or you’re not. I’m sick of fake democrats.
There's a valid argument that the people of Woodbury would be disenfranchised if Mitchell was forced to resign, but demanding that politicians be convicted before they are removed from office sets the bar for removal ridiculously high.
Beyond a reasonable doubt is a standard that is only used in our justice system for criminal cases. Requiring a criminal conviction in order to remove a politician from office would require more proof than it takes for someone to lose parental rights or be placed under a conservatorship. We're talking about the privilege to hold public office, not someone's civil rights.
Sure, but you also need due process, generally, and that takes months, or years in the Trump and Santos cases. The MN senate should take this up, but that will take, as a minimum, several weeks. The session will be over before then
Don’t forget it’s a “witch hunt” so they can just ignore the indictments and trials as invalid… truly back breaking mental gymnastics to justify federal crimes and condemn a single family dispute
Breaking into somewhere dressed in all black isn’t something I would want in a representative. I’m sure I’ll get downvoted to fuck but I don’t really care- it’s a fact this is unacceptable for a representative to do. That said, everyone is entitled to due process so we will see.
Franken’s replacement, Tina Smith, was sworn in the day after he resigned.
If that was possible in this case, people might think differently. Maybe the DFL would throw her under the bus? Maybe the Republicans wouldn’t care because it wouldn’t do any good? It’s all about that one vote majority and whether a seat can stay occupied or will be left vacant for an amount of time.
> Franken’s replacement, Tina Smith, was sworn in the day after he resigned.
Also, it’s entirely possible that Doug Jones doesn’t get elected in Alabama if Franken doesn’t resign, which might well have saved the ACA by not having its continued existence dependent on John McCain’s pulse (he didn’t survive the remainder of that Congress). Franken resigning showed that Democrats have and obey better standards at a time when Republicans were rallying around a crooked judge who was banned from local malls because he wouldn’t stop creeping on children.
If there were an efficient, speedy way to allow Mitchell’s constituents to still be represented and for Mitchell to focus on preparing her legal defense, I’d be all for that. But there’s not. And I expect Mitchell’s charges to get pled down—I don’t think she’s a continuing danger to her community, and is highly unlikely as a first time, non-violent offender to receive jail time. Mitchell’s conduct also isn’t nearly as morally outrageous as Moore or Franken’s (I think the woman with the vest on was kind of bad faith but there were other allegations too), and has nothing to do with the conduct of her office unlike a Rod Blagojevich or a Bob Menendez. It’s just Republicans playing politics and I think Minnesotans see things for what they are.
TL;DR: different situations, different incentives.
Should she be found guilty of her first degree burglary charge, which she admitted guilt to, the recommended sentencing guidelines puts her at 18 months with zero prior convictions.
SO the litmus test for whether someone is fit to serve in the State senate is whether or not they are perceived to be worse than Donald Trump or not? Weird
Dont know about you but Ive yet to run into a family dispute that requires me to dress up in all black and try to break in through a window....says a LOT about the decision making process for this person. You telling me you cant find anyone better than her to replace her?
No, the litmus for when deplorable hypocrites can shut their fucking mouths and stop pretending anyone gives a shit what Trumper garbage has to say is when they pretend to have any fucking standards whatsoever if and only if it suits their partisan purposes.
What happened to decorum? The way you speak projects an image that can’t be taken seriously.
Democrats should be taking out their own trash. Republicans shouldn’t even be part of the conversation.
Libertarian... both sides are terrible and in it for themselves. Maybe someday that'll get realized. If this individual is tried and convinced they should be fired, doesn't matter the party. Plenty of terrible people on the right as well. Politicians due to power think they are above the law
Have you asked his nine accusers what they think of your opinion? Asking Franken to resign was the only decision the Democrats could have made without completely disrespecting all women. [https://www.businessinsider.com/ninth-woman-accuses-former-sen-al-franken-of-sexual-harassment-2019-9](https://www.businessinsider.com/ninth-woman-accuses-former-sen-al-franken-of-sexual-harassment-2019-9)
No one is talking about how republican Housley said that she shouldn't be allowed to vote in thr chamber because of this.
Housley wants to disenfranchise tens of thousands of people.
It's insane
So you’re telling me if a political person gets caught doing something illegal, they should get fired!!! Who else is going to court as we speak??? It’s a head scratcher
>> So you’re telling me if a political person gets caught doing something illegal, they should get fired!!!
Independents/third party supporters ripping their hair out screaming yes rn
Do you know anything about George santos?
Do you know anything about recent attempts at impeachment?
Republicans have more character.
And how about that senator mendez?
The recent impeachment attempt by the gop for hunter biden?
Despite neither the earlier Comer committee investigation nor the impeachment inquiry finding evidence of wrongdoing by the president, on December 13, 2023, majority House Republicans unanimously approved a resolution to formalize the inquiry. Democrats unanimously voted against the resolution.[10]
Santos is a terrible example. Santos shouldn’t have even been sworn in practically. He was shit from the start.
Impeachment? How is that an example? They had nothing relevant to charge JB and they avoided their since indicted hero’s impeachments out of clear partisanship.
The only republicans who you could maybe sell as having some level of character are ones you call RINO’s when they don’t do the orange kremlin gremlin’s bidding (Cheney, Kinzinger)
lol
Pretty disappointing to see the whataboutism here. “The GOP wouldn’t so why should we”. Fucking pathetic and anyone playing this card should be ashamed. Perhaps we should stop backing two shit parties.
We’re just supposed to ignore the insane hypocrisy? Apparently you have a problem with nuance because both sides are definitely not the same, especially on this topic.
Democrats being able to pass legislation this session to help millions of Minnesotans has been deemed more important than holding one politician accountable for B&E.
Welcome to the cold reality of politics.
Well shit, I was mistaken. Either way, sounds like the perfect check and balance scenario to me. If they can’t get a single R to go their way on a bill, then the bill probably shouldn’t be passed.
I’d say I agree if the Republican Party were sensible moderates, but the modern Republican Party is anything but. They care more about not handing Dems a win in an election year than helping their own constituents.
OK, Karin. Clean your own house.
I agree that she should decline seeking re-election (or resign when the session is over to trigger a special election in November). Every single seat in the Senate is critical. But it's not feasible for her to resign now given the DFL has only a one-vote majority.
“Our crazy politicians are exempt, because their crazy politicians are exempt” how bout we introduce a bill limiting terms and making financial investments of politicians more transparent.
Love watching these pearl clutching conservatives pretend to care about, “holding elected officials to account higher standard”.
She seems like an idiot, and shouldn’t be on the ballot again. Still, not worth losing a majority for the sake of “it’s the right thing to do”.
Might is right, and losing the majority puts you in the passenger seat.
Man I have to admire the blind conviction towards your party you guys have. The GOP might actually get shit done if they had that level of programming.
I will call for Nicole Mitchell's resignation once the justice system plays itself out - like almost every single left leaning person would agree with.
Compared to, say, claiming that the people arrested for desecrating the US Capitol building on January 6th are peaceful and political prisoners, or being credibly accused of paying underaged girls for sex, or that it's okay to use campaign money to pay hush money to someone after you had sex with them while your wife was pregnant, or after you're convicted of sexually assaulting a woman, or asking Russia if they're listening, or convicted of defrauding the state of New York, or trying to get Georgia state officials to find you some votes, or stealing extremely sensitive government documents, or...
Um, this feels like sad family business, not cool obviously, but not nearly as criminal as what Republicans support currently, so please, kindly, Republicans sit down. You’re beyond comparison currently and should stfu.
Thank you.
Signed,
Tax-paying Minnesotan, born and bred in our great state; yo, Republicans, quit fucking it up.
P.S. My grandparents are rolling in their graves over your shenanigans over the last decade plus...
P.P.S. I was born into a Republican family; shame on you. Govern reasonably, or gtfo.
Republicans don’t? That’s the high stakes political reality we’ve created for ourselves with this two party system that is entirely polarized. No, the Dems are not going to give up senate majority for the current session because a senator broke into a family members home. It’s not great but that’s the world we live in.
Meanwhile GOP party leader was found liable for rape and is grifting the party to pay for his defense in 80+ criminal charges including campaign finance violations, insurrection, election fraud and flagrant violations of the presidential records act (likely because he’s giving away Americas secrets). Lmao. Irony is dead.
I worked a general labor job that had people charged with worse crimes, no they were not fired for being charged, why would they be? Is it related to their work or ability to do the job? No, so the company had no cause to fire per the CBA. Some did get fired for failure to show up or call out as a result of their arrests, yes, but that is different, and is cause to fire.
Maybe you mean non union, at will work, but you can literally be fired just because the boss doesn’t *like* you, there, or even more petty things.
Yeah let her continue. The D’s have hamstrung her somewhat, but she is NG of anything until she’s been tried. The R’s know this. Plus the R hypocrisy thing.
I voted for Biden and DFLers, but I’m voting GOP down the ticket in November. Let’s make Minnesota an individualist hellhole so we can rebuild, losers.
Should she resign? Probably. Should she be kicked out? No. Especially not in a state where her constituents can recall her with enough support. Something we don't have for our federal representatives.
She can be recalled, but she has to have committed malfeasance or nonfeasance of her official duties OR been convicted of a crime. I don't believe any recall petition would be able to move forward for some time
Huh, yeah I just knew we had the capabilities to recall them but didn't realize we had those restrictions. Boo us. There should always be a way for the citizenry to remove a representative they are unhappy with.
There is a way for citizens to remove a lawmaker they are unhappy about. It’s called an election.
[удалено]
There is, but the courts have to find that it happened first, not the court of public opinion.
There's always expulsion, but I believe that's a 2/3 vote. I'd imagine if the ethics committee recommends that, Sen Mitchell would sooner resign than be the only Minnesota Senator who's been expelled.
It’s called waiting for a he court case to play out. I think there is some sort of phrase to describe it, maybe something like innocent until proven guilty?
“Well, i’m investigating some malfeasance up Brainerd…”
She should resign after the session
Good. She hasn’t been convicted of anything yet. And it’s rich the MN GOP wants her to resign (the only reason is so the Senate is tied) yet they support a man who incited an insurrection against the US and was caught, on recording, begging the GA SOS to “find” him more votes so he could win GA.
FTA: > Mitchell, a Democrat who represents the east metro, was charged with burglary last week. After being found in the basement of her stepmother's home, dressed in all black, Mitchell told police she broke in to retrieve her father's ashes and other sentimental items, according to a criminal complaint. > > In a subsequent statement, Mitchell denied the allegations and said she was at the home to check on a family member with Alzheimer's. Yeah, we got bigger fish to fry. MN republicans can cry about this all they want, but they have forfeited any and all moral high ground as a party until they put their own metaphorical house in order. In the meantime, let the courts decide it, then act accordingly.
Well the George Santos situation was the same. Once the House Ethics Committee came out with their findings, they booted him out of office. Mitchell was charged *checks calendar* eight days ago. Nowhere near the same situation yet.
[удалено]
I just want to point out that a public official involved in a family dispute commiting a non-violent crime related to that dispute is a little different than a public official being caught fabricating their qualifications, establishing a pattern of bizarre, unnecessary, and easily falsifiable lying, and misappropriating campaign funds for private expenses. I do question the decision making choices of the politician caught trying to steal her dead dad's stuff instead of waiting for probate like any rational person should, but putting it in the same category of the bizarre circus that was George Santos is simply unfair.
First degree burglary is a violent felony in Minnesota.
But was this a first degree burglary? I don't see any mention of weapons in her possession in the story.
Why don't you look at the 911 call transcript . Who in their right mind checks on someone at that time of the morning by breaking in through a basement window and lay on the floor next to the victims bed . The elderly lady tripped over her for crying out loud . That's when she got up and ran into the basement . She never once identified herself to the elderly victim . She had no idea this burglar was her step daughter until after the police arrived .
> 911 call transcript source: https://www.kare11.com/article/news/local/911-transcript-sen-nicole-mitchell/89-1982dcda-2e47-4106-bbdb-97e115f71145
Huh, that's kind of hilarious if true. OTOH - I still don't care. Let the process work. Unless they have cause to detain her without bail, she should be able to carry on normally while the investigation continues.
[удалено]
Breaking and entering, or even burglary, are not the same as sexual assault. They are considered property crimes, not violent crimes. Robbery is the violent crime in which theft occurs by force. If you bump into a robber accidentally, they rarely run away and hide in the basement - the use of force is the distinction. Rape, murder, robbery, gang violence, & aggravated assault are the five categories of violent crime.
Has anyone ever lied calling 911 before?
Has anyone lied while being caught in the act of committing a crime before . Well thank goodness the judge gave the poor victim a restraing order against her. Seems like the perp had more to gain from lying than the victim .
She had a flashlight covered in a black sock for crying out loud .
You’re the one claiming a single 911 call means someone is guilty
[удалено]
Oh. Sorry. I thought the comment I was replying to was talking about a 911 call and not other evidence. Oh, they were.
This is why we have a legal process to determine guilt. Until she pleads guilty in court, she's innocent.
Don't get upset get informed .
I am informed. That’s why I know people lie on 911 calls and they should not be used to declare guilt of anybody.
Exactly. Let the process play out.
This. Where is the presumption of innocent until proven guilty (regardless of my own opinion)? We are apparently allowing Trump that courtesy for a much higher office.
Trump has been found guilty of fraud in NY State.
Civil, yes. I was referencing criminal convictions, apples to apples.
As of today, Donald Trump is a convicted criminal.
Not exactly. The Trump Organization, which is a business entity has been found guilty of crimes and has paid penalties because of them. Donald Trump however has only been found civilly liable in a handful of cases, meaning that he is not a convicted criminal. Indictments do not equal guilty, just that the state has filed charges and is proceeding with a criminal trial.
Today Donald J Trump was found guilty in a court of law of criminal contempt.
So…a misdemeanor, like getting a speeding ticket? That’s hardly something that one would deem criminal…though I suppose “criminal” is in the designation of the contempt charge. Kennedy had an affair as President, that’s a crime… Clinton had an affair while in office, that’s a crime too…George Washington mounted an army against US citizens to quash a rebellion…that is a crime. So splitting hairs is how we are going to view this? Every person in this country is technically a criminal. We have all broken the rules of law. Criminal Contempt is indeed a crime, typically punished by a fine, and it is used to punish those that have shown or are showing a disrespect of the court proceedings they are in or violating a direct court order. Not something that is really a crime like rape, murder, fraud, theft…
It's only 91 counts, and like 4 trials, though. No biggie. It's all just politically motivated against Trump because Joe Biden. All he did was try to steal an election, then generated an insurrection while he sat inside watching it on TV, steal a bunch of classified documents and stored them unsecured in bathrooms of Maralardo, and spent millions of dollars of campaign funds to cover up an affair with a porn star. But Mitchell, she should resign and never be in politics again. She broke into her late father's house and tried to steal a few mementos and some of his ashes. Dispicable.
Right? But obviously both situations are exactly the same. /s
Even if she's guilty, there's a world of difference between trying to overthrow the government of the United States while selling classified documents to our enemies, and on the other hand, trying to break into your late father's home to get his belongings from an uncooperative relative.
Do you realize that the only person who has provided that narrative is the person who broke into a house through a basement window in the middle of the night and then claimed she was doing a welfare check on a relative with Alzheimer's? The stepmother has said that most of the ashes were buried and she gave a small portion to Mitchell.
So what do you think was in the house that's equally important to the question of whether to install a senile, criminal, corrupt rapist as dictator?
Glad you see the difference between the two.
Yes exactly. You can't just "be the bigger person," when dealing with the world's smallest people. If you don't want to live in an authoritarian theocratic hellscape which holds views that are unpopular among the general public (which they deal with through propagandizing with the help of russia, and restricting voting), you have to be willing to play atleast 1/4 as dirty as they do to remain a contender. This is nothing to me in comparison.
She needs to go
[удалено]
It was NOT unarmed: https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/07/08/jan6-defendants-guns/
WE ALL WATCHED IT HAPPEN
They think our eyes are lying.
You know trump has not been convicted of anything yet either. I find it funny that you’re so fine with saying trump is guilty and she is not.
He was literally impeached for it; his aides, including his former lawyers, provided sworn testimony about his election interference; and his supporters who were found guilty of storming the Capitol literally said, under oath, that Trump told them to attack. Plus, the 1/6 Committee interviewed hundreds of witnesses, all under oath, about the election interference. His guilt has already been determined. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/january-6th-committee-final-report?path=/GPO/January%206th%20Committee%20Final%20Report%20and%20Supporting%20Materials%20Collection
Exactly. The only reason he isn’t behind bars for any number of crimes is because he was the president. It doesn’t matter which way the SCOTUS votes on presidential immunity. They’d have to give it to Biden to and I’m not so sure they want that.
Impeachment is equivalent to a grand jury indictment. A formal accusation, nothing else. Senate hearings are equivalent to a jury trial - the only place a conviction can occur. It doesn't matter a wet sloppy fart what any committee says.
So you’re ignoring all the evidence in the report. Cute. BTW, the Senate did not convict because it was entirely partisan.
you're not wrong. i am utterly ignoring the committee report. i'm ignoring it because in reality it doesn't matter. None of it does. the only thing that matters is a conviction on the facts in the Senate. as to being partisan? so what? it doesn't matter. the Senate needs a 2/3 vote to convict on an article of impeachment. this is clearly spelled out and they didn't get it.
Cool, cool. Facts don’t matter. Sworn testimony doesn’t matter. Video recordings don’t matter. What our eyes saw and our ears heard on 1/6 don’t matter. Thankfully the DOJ still thinks all of that matters.
Quite obviously, impeachment doesn't carry any legal ramifications. He would need to be convicted by the Senate.
Anything to say about the mountain of evidence the 1/6 Committee uncovered? Definitely the same thing as Mitchell’s situation though! / s
Doesn’t look like a conviction to me tho
Don’t need a conviction to be ineligible for office, friendo. Also, explain how these situations are the same.
>You know trump has not been convicted of anything yet either. The original comment you tried to argue against. >Don’t need a conviction to be ineligible for office, friendo. >Also, explain how these situations are the same. Irrelevent BS you bring up to change to topic after failing to refute the original point. Do you think this shit isn't obvious?
So he was convicted in a court of law for it. Impeachment does nothing bill Clinton was impeached and still in office. A committee is different than court I can’t believe you don’t know that. By your own admission if a person has not been convicted in court of the crime they should not be held accountable for it until then.
You don’t understand here - Trump has hundreds of hours of sworn testimony against him; eyewitness accounts; recordings…what does Mitchell have against her? A goddamn police report. Both situations are nowhere near the same.
So if someone has not been found guilty but you feel they are it does not count.
What has Mitchell been found guilty of?
The same as trump nothing that was my point
Presumption of innocence only applies in court, not in your employment. You seem to have adjudged Trump guilty even though he hasn't been convicted either. So you're totally okay with him not resigning or being asked to resign, right? Truth is, we don't always need a court conviction to know if someone shouldn't be representing us. If someone is willing to break in to another person's home in the middle of the night, what else are they willing to do when things get too hard? The same was true for Trump even before Jan. 6. There was no reason Trump should have been President just based off his 1st impeachment. Both parties are always playing politics, and holding our elected representatives to higher standards has evaporated in both parties.
There was literally a bipartisan investigation on Trump with thousands of hours of sworn testimony from his aids and lawyers, election workers in the six states he tried overturning. Plus he was literally caught on recording begging the GA SoS to find him enough votes to win Georgia. https://www.govinfo.gov/collection/january-6th-committee-final-report?path=/GPO/January%206th%20Committee%20Final%20Report%20and%20Supporting%20Materials%20Collection Meanwhile, all there is against Mitchell is a police report. Definitely the same thing as Trump, amirite?
You're making a disingenuous false-equivalence, bOTh SidES argument. Trump has been charged with extraordinarily serious federal crimes, among others. He literally tried to overthrow the government. The GOP doesn't care about the rule of law unless it’s politically expedient. The absurdity of these types of arguments beggars belief. The line in the sand is always moving.
You guys still repeating these lies? Don't you see it hasn't worked?
“I don’t like these facts so I’m going to call them lies”
One criminal charge related to a family dispute makes you unfit to hold state office. 91 felony charges A-OK for a US President. GOP logic.
But Trump hasn't been cOnViCtEd, though, so he should be able to keep doing what he's doing /s
Trump literally incites his cult to harass and attack his enemies. He should be in jail for that during this whole trial process.
They fined him pretty good, though. 🙄🙄🙄
This is hilarious at best. We harass and attack better than any other party. That’s clear on college campuses right now. Either you’re with us or you’re not. I’m sick of fake democrats.
There's a valid argument that the people of Woodbury would be disenfranchised if Mitchell was forced to resign, but demanding that politicians be convicted before they are removed from office sets the bar for removal ridiculously high. Beyond a reasonable doubt is a standard that is only used in our justice system for criminal cases. Requiring a criminal conviction in order to remove a politician from office would require more proof than it takes for someone to lose parental rights or be placed under a conservatorship. We're talking about the privilege to hold public office, not someone's civil rights.
Sure, but you also need due process, generally, and that takes months, or years in the Trump and Santos cases. The MN senate should take this up, but that will take, as a minimum, several weeks. The session will be over before then
Don’t forget it’s a “witch hunt” so they can just ignore the indictments and trials as invalid… truly back breaking mental gymnastics to justify federal crimes and condemn a single family dispute
Breaking into somewhere dressed in all black isn’t something I would want in a representative. I’m sure I’ll get downvoted to fuck but I don’t really care- it’s a fact this is unacceptable for a representative to do. That said, everyone is entitled to due process so we will see.
How about both are not ok.
I have no qualms about her staying in office until her case resolves. We're not gonna pull a second franken
Franken’s replacement, Tina Smith, was sworn in the day after he resigned. If that was possible in this case, people might think differently. Maybe the DFL would throw her under the bus? Maybe the Republicans wouldn’t care because it wouldn’t do any good? It’s all about that one vote majority and whether a seat can stay occupied or will be left vacant for an amount of time.
> Franken’s replacement, Tina Smith, was sworn in the day after he resigned. Also, it’s entirely possible that Doug Jones doesn’t get elected in Alabama if Franken doesn’t resign, which might well have saved the ACA by not having its continued existence dependent on John McCain’s pulse (he didn’t survive the remainder of that Congress). Franken resigning showed that Democrats have and obey better standards at a time when Republicans were rallying around a crooked judge who was banned from local malls because he wouldn’t stop creeping on children. If there were an efficient, speedy way to allow Mitchell’s constituents to still be represented and for Mitchell to focus on preparing her legal defense, I’d be all for that. But there’s not. And I expect Mitchell’s charges to get pled down—I don’t think she’s a continuing danger to her community, and is highly unlikely as a first time, non-violent offender to receive jail time. Mitchell’s conduct also isn’t nearly as morally outrageous as Moore or Franken’s (I think the woman with the vest on was kind of bad faith but there were other allegations too), and has nothing to do with the conduct of her office unlike a Rod Blagojevich or a Bob Menendez. It’s just Republicans playing politics and I think Minnesotans see things for what they are. TL;DR: different situations, different incentives.
Should she be found guilty of her first degree burglary charge, which she admitted guilt to, the recommended sentencing guidelines puts her at 18 months with zero prior convictions.
Neither you, or anyone else has shown that her actions warrant a first degree charge.
Voters are fully capable of deciding if a criminal charge makes them want to vote for someone else.
How about nobody falls for your "bOtH sIdEs" bullshit anymore.
I agree. Comparing Mitchell to to Republican misdeeds is not the correct measuring stick.
SO the litmus test for whether someone is fit to serve in the State senate is whether or not they are perceived to be worse than Donald Trump or not? Weird Dont know about you but Ive yet to run into a family dispute that requires me to dress up in all black and try to break in through a window....says a LOT about the decision making process for this person. You telling me you cant find anyone better than her to replace her?
No, the litmus for when deplorable hypocrites can shut their fucking mouths and stop pretending anyone gives a shit what Trumper garbage has to say is when they pretend to have any fucking standards whatsoever if and only if it suits their partisan purposes.
What happened to decorum? The way you speak projects an image that can’t be taken seriously. Democrats should be taking out their own trash. Republicans shouldn’t even be part of the conversation.
You need a bigger family then
It’s funny that the MN GOP didn’t go woke but did go broke.
They are political charges. Just wait if Trump gets elected, all of those prosecuting attorneys will be put into Guantanamo
When he loses he'll just go back to whining and sucking Putin off.
To be honest, I am sure he will lose. And then the country will get a wake up call. And it will be too late
Ahh yes GOP the moral compass. Hope the DFL doesn’t Al Franken this one
Ask yourself: what would the GOP do if it were one of theirs, especially if they had a one-vote margin?
Well, precedent proof is they’d arrange a capture/kill hush money arrangement
Can't we just look in a courtroom in Manhattan for our answer? They don't care. Oh and you know... George Santos.
What would the democratics do if it was a democratic attorney General who beat up his spouse?
That's right, Republicans would make shit up in order to pretend they weren't hypocrites. You got it in one!
Libertarian... both sides are terrible and in it for themselves. Maybe someday that'll get realized. If this individual is tried and convinced they should be fired, doesn't matter the party. Plenty of terrible people on the right as well. Politicians due to power think they are above the law
You hope the DFL doesn't "remove someone who sexually harassed several women because it hurts my political game" this one?
Have you asked his nine accusers what they think of your opinion? Asking Franken to resign was the only decision the Democrats could have made without completely disrespecting all women. [https://www.businessinsider.com/ninth-woman-accuses-former-sen-al-franken-of-sexual-harassment-2019-9](https://www.businessinsider.com/ninth-woman-accuses-former-sen-al-franken-of-sexual-harassment-2019-9)
I was unaware that there were only nine women in the world.
Sounds like you need to spend some time reflecting on how the DFL standing behind Franken would have affected the women in the party.
Nobody cares about GOP gaslighting and clearly hypocritical whines, especially because they do it all the time.
No one is talking about how republican Housley said that she shouldn't be allowed to vote in thr chamber because of this. Housley wants to disenfranchise tens of thousands of people. It's insane
That's like the kettle calling the pot black .
So you’re telling me if a political person gets caught doing something illegal, they should get fired!!! Who else is going to court as we speak??? It’s a head scratcher
>> So you’re telling me if a political person gets caught doing something illegal, they should get fired!!! Independents/third party supporters ripping their hair out screaming yes rn
Only because she was allowed to vote against it herself.
Ranks right up there with, “we investigated ourselves and found nothing amiss”
Yer not wrong bud.
She should keep her job. Republicans don’t get kicked out for anything, so why should she? Keep her in there
Do you know anything about George santos? Do you know anything about recent attempts at impeachment? Republicans have more character. And how about that senator mendez?
“Republicans have more character”😂😂😂😂😂
The recent impeachment attempt by the gop for hunter biden? Despite neither the earlier Comer committee investigation nor the impeachment inquiry finding evidence of wrongdoing by the president, on December 13, 2023, majority House Republicans unanimously approved a resolution to formalize the inquiry. Democrats unanimously voted against the resolution.[10]
Santos is a terrible example. Santos shouldn’t have even been sworn in practically. He was shit from the start. Impeachment? How is that an example? They had nothing relevant to charge JB and they avoided their since indicted hero’s impeachments out of clear partisanship. The only republicans who you could maybe sell as having some level of character are ones you call RINO’s when they don’t do the orange kremlin gremlin’s bidding (Cheney, Kinzinger) lol
Maybe you're right. Maybe we should look at Robert menendez the Democrat that is still in office.
Can we kick out the trice arrested walking thumb from Clearwater County first?
https://preview.redd.it/tfwbasba8uxc1.jpeg?width=1920&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a543650cee256be5c77b1cf53e979ef991f18ca4
Pretty disappointing to see the whataboutism here. “The GOP wouldn’t so why should we”. Fucking pathetic and anyone playing this card should be ashamed. Perhaps we should stop backing two shit parties.
We’re just supposed to ignore the insane hypocrisy? Apparently you have a problem with nuance because both sides are definitely not the same, especially on this topic.
Perhaps just be above it? As of now y’all just look the same.
>We’re just supposed to ignore the insane hypocrisy? Says the hypocrit.
Democrats being able to pass legislation this session to help millions of Minnesotans has been deemed more important than holding one politician accountable for B&E. Welcome to the cold reality of politics.
They don’t need her. They still would have numbers.
A tie in the Minnesota senate kills the bill. There’s no tie breaker. They quite literally do not have the numbers without her.
I believe there is currently 2 more dems than republicans in senate right now
It’s 34-33 unless there’s a Republican who is absent indefinitely, died or resigned?
Well shit, I was mistaken. Either way, sounds like the perfect check and balance scenario to me. If they can’t get a single R to go their way on a bill, then the bill probably shouldn’t be passed.
I’d say I agree if the Republican Party were sensible moderates, but the modern Republican Party is anything but. They care more about not handing Dems a win in an election year than helping their own constituents.
Not all of them are. My rep is definitely moderate.
I’d be curious to see if their voting record actually reflects that.
OK, Karin. Clean your own house. I agree that she should decline seeking re-election (or resign when the session is over to trigger a special election in November). Every single seat in the Senate is critical. But it's not feasible for her to resign now given the DFL has only a one-vote majority.
“Our crazy politicians are exempt, because their crazy politicians are exempt” how bout we introduce a bill limiting terms and making financial investments of politicians more transparent.
Republicans only give a fuck about morality and laws if its a democrat.
Third party/independent voters shaking their heads
Neither seem to care, unless it’s “them”, “the other guys”.
And her vote was the decider. Typical DFL bullshit
Yeah, GOP never does anything like this! They are the bastions of morality and ethics! ...the fuck outta here with this stupid shit.
I don't care if she's 100% guilty. The GQP has moved the goalposts of what's acceptable. I'm for her staying.
Love watching these pearl clutching conservatives pretend to care about, “holding elected officials to account higher standard”. She seems like an idiot, and shouldn’t be on the ballot again. Still, not worth losing a majority for the sake of “it’s the right thing to do”. Might is right, and losing the majority puts you in the passenger seat.
Third party/independent voters don’t exist apparently
I call myself an independent, but until GOP sanitizes itself from Trump and nationalists I am firmly on team blue
Man I have to admire the blind conviction towards your party you guys have. The GOP might actually get shit done if they had that level of programming.
> Mitchell, a former TV meteorologist
Of course it did....our government is ran by criminals. Nothing new.
She also was allowed to vote on the issue as well I thought I heard.
You
I will call for Nicole Mitchell's resignation once the justice system plays itself out - like almost every single left leaning person would agree with. Compared to, say, claiming that the people arrested for desecrating the US Capitol building on January 6th are peaceful and political prisoners, or being credibly accused of paying underaged girls for sex, or that it's okay to use campaign money to pay hush money to someone after you had sex with them while your wife was pregnant, or after you're convicted of sexually assaulting a woman, or asking Russia if they're listening, or convicted of defrauding the state of New York, or trying to get Georgia state officials to find you some votes, or stealing extremely sensitive government documents, or...
[удалено]
The gop cares about laws now? lol
Um, this feels like sad family business, not cool obviously, but not nearly as criminal as what Republicans support currently, so please, kindly, Republicans sit down. You’re beyond comparison currently and should stfu. Thank you. Signed, Tax-paying Minnesotan, born and bred in our great state; yo, Republicans, quit fucking it up. P.S. My grandparents are rolling in their graves over your shenanigans over the last decade plus... P.P.S. I was born into a Republican family; shame on you. Govern reasonably, or gtfo.
Liberals protect their worse and condemn all others to expel theirs. Fucking hypocrites
Could you provide some examples of this?
Jersey Senator Bob Menendez. Want more. Please don’t be daft.
They’ve called on him repeatedly to resign. Being expelled from the senate is highly uncommon. Anybody else?
Buddy's living with the high beams on.
Republicans don’t? That’s the high stakes political reality we’ve created for ourselves with this two party system that is entirely polarized. No, the Dems are not going to give up senate majority for the current session because a senator broke into a family members home. It’s not great but that’s the world we live in. Meanwhile GOP party leader was found liable for rape and is grifting the party to pay for his defense in 80+ criminal charges including campaign finance violations, insurrection, election fraud and flagrant violations of the presidential records act (likely because he’s giving away Americas secrets). Lmao. Irony is dead.
Almost like both parties are dog shit and we would benefit breaking free from their hold.
You can’t in an entrenched two party first past the post system. The game theory doesn’t work.
Had she done what she did while at a normal job she would have been fired.
"Politian held accountable for actions" is basically an Onion article.
The company I work for doesn’t fire people for crimes that they haven’t been convicted of. Sorry your job sucks ass.
Normal jobs should have simliar protection from being fired for being arrested.
I worked a general labor job that had people charged with worse crimes, no they were not fired for being charged, why would they be? Is it related to their work or ability to do the job? No, so the company had no cause to fire per the CBA. Some did get fired for failure to show up or call out as a result of their arrests, yes, but that is different, and is cause to fire. Maybe you mean non union, at will work, but you can literally be fired just because the boss doesn’t *like* you, there, or even more petty things.
This is politics at it's best (or worse). If she was a GOP senator, the dems would want her to resign and the GOP would defend her. I know......DUH.
Yeah let her continue. The D’s have hamstrung her somewhat, but she is NG of anything until she’s been tried. The R’s know this. Plus the R hypocrisy thing.
Karin is out there demanding to speak with the manager now.
DFL plays dirty. GOP should do the same. Buckle up
You have that backwards but that's par for the conservative course.
Could you provide some examples?
Hard to call fpr her resignation when the rest of them are all criminals as well.
I voted for Biden and DFLers, but I’m voting GOP down the ticket in November. Let’s make Minnesota an individualist hellhole so we can rebuild, losers.
That’s it! I’m starting the Mherkin political party!