PC friday question of the day.

[gingyguy]

Ok then I agree you could not be impartial. You are excused. 

I wasn't going to tell that to the judge!!! I don't want to be excused !!!! 

[ExGingi]

Ok then I agree you could not be impartial. You are excused. 

You are aware that politicians is one of the three most dishonest and unethical occupations out there. Are you?

[TimT]

I said 6 months ago . I guess I "misunderestimated" 

The hunt has been going on since he was elected. I don’t recall anyone ever playing nice.

[gingyguy]

The hunt has been going on since he was elected. I don’t recall anyone ever playing nice.

There are different levels.

[CountValentine]

Let me turn that question to you with a twist.

Your impartiality tells you to vote one way. But you know that you and a select few are willing to be impartial, with everyone else voting along party lines, and your impartial vote goes against your party line and has the power to tip the scale. How do you vote?

You can turn twist spin the question any way you want to. If you take the oath then you follow it. If you are going to be impartial then the rest does not matter.

[Yehuda57]

There are different levels.

[whYME]

You look at the evidence and decide the case on that evidence.

Was Clinton acquitted based on the evidence?

[CountValentine]

Was Clinton acquitted based on the evidence?

IMHO no.
You still trying to put the square peg in the round hole? 

[whYME]

You still trying to put the square peg in the round hole? 

Believe it or not I'm trying to establish common ground, so I guess that makes it a yes?

IMHO no.

Do you think it was decided correctly? Do you think the Jurors there acted impartially?

[CountValentine]

Do you think it was decided correctly?

No

Do you think the Jurors there acted impartially?

To long ago to remember their votes.

[whYME]

No

I'm not sure I agree, but I'm afraid I need to

wait until tomorrow

to continue...

[CountValentine]

I'm not sure I agree, but I'm afraid I need to...

You asked so I answered. If you or anyone else agrees or not doesn't matter. 

[mercaz1]

is anyone truly impartial in any jury? this doesn't mean that you can't decide something based on evidence presented but it does make it a higher bar to jump over

[ExGingi]

is anyone truly impartial in any jury? this doesn't mean that you can't decide something based on evidence presented but it does make it a higher bar to jump over

That's an old trick to get dismissed from Jury duty. I guess senators can't play that trick.  Warren and Sanders might have loved to pull that one, but OTOH it could backfire as it would be seen as non-presidential.

[CountValentine]

is anyone truly impartial in any jury?

Yes

[Yehuda57]

Yes

Everyone has biases, if not overt, certainly subconsciously. This has been proven time and time again. There is no such thing as a truly impartial human, it's only a question of degree.

[Yonah]

You are aware that politicians is one of the three most dishonest and unethical occupations out there. Are you?

What are the other two?

[yeshivabucher]

What are the other two?

meteorologists and used car salesman

[Yonah]

Everyone has biases, if not overt, certainly subconsciously. This has been proven time and time again. There is no such thing as a truly impartial human, it's only a question of degree.

I'm with Yehuda here.

Specifically in this case (even more so than in Clinton's case) the impeachment vote was entirely partisan. Which leads me to believe that any of the members of congress who tell you they were voting on the evidence are full of crap.

[CountValentine]

Everyone has biases, if not overt, certainly subconsciously. This has been proven time and time again. There is no such thing as a truly impartial human, it's only a question of degree.

Of course everyone has biases. They has nothing to do with being impartial.