Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Trying to extort a foreign country into interfering in our elections is not a big deal? Using the office of the president for his own personal gain is not a big deal?
actually you could make a strong case that it was not interfering in an election because Biden was not going to be elected anyway...………..
I think that was tongue-in-cheek. he was poking fun at the Dems, wasn't he?
LOL. No. He said Trump is guilty but shouldn't be impeached. It's written in simple language so that Trump supporters can understand exactly what he means.
Trying to extort a foreign country into interfering in our elections is not a big deal? Using the office of the president for his own personal gain is not a big deal?
Interfering in our elections? You're off your rocker. Providing information is the opposite of interfering.
Trump supporters and the GOP are essentially arguing that the Constitution is unconstitutional when they state impeachment is to "undo an election. Most Americans know that is simply a last ditch effort to justify why the only impeachment trial in history has no witnesses.
you do know the 17 "witnesses" statements and testimony was shown and admitted to the senate. How can you say there were no witnesses? They were the ones the house brought to the senate. Videos and depositions. what more do you need?
LOL. No. He said Trump is guilty but shouldn't be impeached. It's written in simple language so that Trump supporters can understand exactly what he means.
No, he said nothing of the sort. Even taking it at face value, you can't find anything about "guilt" in it.
Anyone who has read the transcript knows there is nothing there. Now if you fabricate lies and go on what a person, heard from a person, from another person what Pencil Neck did yes there was something there.
You have to read more than the "transcript" which was not really a transcript but only a partial report of the phone call. If you had watched the hearings in the House, or saw the clips of it they played during the impeachment trial in the Senate, you would know there was a lot more going on then just the "transcript."
I have been watching it all with my own eyes and ears. He held back money that congress had appropriated for Ukraine (a crime since after the Nixon impeachment), and he used that holdback of money to solicit a bribe from the new Pres of Ukraine, asking for the announcement of an investigation into the Bidens. He has an FBI and CIA (which he controls) to do investigations. There was no need to bribe, or to send his PERSONAL lawyer to stir things up over there. All to get a soundbite on CNN to smear Biden. That's not OK.
The House proved nothing. Not one of the SEVENTEEN testimonies provided anything significant and most of those could not say that there was any impeachable offense.
A first year law student could've put the kabosh on the sham Schiff show the Democrats are running.
They were FACT WITNESSES. Their jobs were to say what happened, what they observed. It is not their job to say if it was impeachable or not. That is the House's job to say. It is the Senate's job to decide..
Interfering in our elections? You're off your rocker. Providing information is the opposite of interfering.
Information is a "thing of value" according to the election laws, which prohibit taking money or any other thing of value from a foreign government. Soliciting a bribe is a crime.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.