Not bad for someone who's only in the job for himself!

In most Western countries, retired people make up a large quota of voters and many are active in political parties. After all, they don't have much else to do. They won't vote for any young whippersnappers.

Trump impeachment process now goes to the Senate.

Where the verdict has already been given by the Republicans before hearing the evidence, refusing to call witnesses with direct personal knowledge but demanding to call the person who first raised the alarm. What kind of example is that?

As with the Clinton impeachment process this is an incredibly political act and for many of us it is difficult to know who is telling the truth.

It's not difficult at all. Things that walk like ducks and quack like ducks are generally ducks. Look at the evidence. Especially of the obstruction. Look at it. Let the defence be presented and the witnesses questioned. Then decide. The Republicans are claiming this is unfair because Trump has not been allowed to question anyone or offer a defence. They are being ridiculous. This isn't yet the trial which is when such things are done. This is merely showing there is a case to answer and setting up the trial.

Andrew Johnson was the first to be impeached and again it was very political with the Republican party out to get him because he favoured allowing the south back into the Union without demanding legal protection for former slaves.

It's being presented by the Republicans in a disgracefully political way. Even though the Democrats know that this may rebound on them they have gone ahead because the constitution demands that they must.

The US constitution is built on the separation of powers and yet in this instance the legislature also acts as the judiciary surely a conflict of interest. I'm not sure why the impeachment process wasn't given to the Supreme Court.

The political system in the USA is no longer fit for purpose as it's primary driver is now money and not the will of the people. We are, regrettably, on the same track. The Supreme Court in the USA is every bit as political now as the Senate and getting more so as Trump stuffs conservatives into it.

And on the subject of the Supreme Court this week Ruth Bader Ginsburg weighed in with her thoughts on Trump to the BBC. Now whilst the Supreme Court is not directly involved in the impeachment process I am surprise that someone as bright as her has intervened justice also has to be seen to be done.

She was firing warning shots at the Senators who are prejudging the trial. As the SCOTUS is also political we ought not be too surprised. I fear for what might happen if she dies before the end of Trump's term.

There is always a possibility that the Supreme Court may get involved in related legal actions for example some witnesses have declined to appear and cited privilege what happens if that is challenged in the SC how impartial will she look then?

She will look better than the others as she always makes sense to me. She is a wise old bird! No SC justice is 100% impartial in the USA.

Back to the Impeachment I seem to remember many arguments on here about Trump being bang to rights by the special prosecutor over Russia and that he would be impeached any day whatever happened to that it seems to have fizzled out?

Barr put an end to that and a muzzle on Mueller. He said that a sitting President cannot be tried in a court. Much of that report has been passed to other Courts for action after Trump is removed, either by impeachment, in 2020 or 2024. The Dems have decided not to bring anything from the Mueller report into the impeachment hearings as they feel they have enough outside of it to make their case and they want the other things left to be heard elsewhere. Trump's time under the spot lamp will arrive when he will have to answer without Twitter beside him or an attorney answering for him. His tax returns will be looked at and all the corruption will come pouring out. It's only a question of time and then whether a new POTUS issues a pardon.