"i just got impeached for making a perfect phone call!"

[Hesychios]

Originally Posted by Fuele

Except with Watergate there was an actual crime. Burglary. Therefore, your analogy is not applicable to the current circumstances.
Try again.

Nixon did not commit the burglary, and that is not what he was being impeached for.

Article One was Obstruction of justice

Article Two was Abuse of presidential power

Article Three was Contempt of Congress

[Boss]

In this case Trump started the whole plan and the call was where he was caught. Trump attempted to bribe the Pres. of Ukraine.

Trump sent Rudi and his buddies to Ukraine. It has been admitted by Rudy.
Trump told his staff to do what Rudy wanted. It was admitted by Sondland and backed up by Parnas as well/

Trump told his staff to break laws by withholding aid. Mulvaney admitted it to us all.

Trump abused the office by committing crimes

[crone]

Originally Posted by TwoByFour

Since the Constitution is silent on what is meant by "high crimes and misdemeanors" it comes down to whether the person (Trump in this case) has crossed the line of what the founders intended. They were very concerned with an out-of-control President and realized that they could not guess all the ways that a bad actor can get in office and wreck havoc, so they left "high crimes" intentionally ambiguous.

It's a lot like Justice Potter and pornography - he couldn't define it but said he knows it when sees it. Same with an impeachable offense - not defined in the Constitution but left up to Congress to say when they see it.

It is up to the Senate to say whether they agree or not. If they think Trump has abused his office, they will vote to convict. If they don't believe it, they won't. It won't be decided on whether an actual crime is required to impeach.

Thank you.

Somebody who gets it.

What a pleasure to read comment from a person who understands the process..