Further, all of the witnesses that we've heard to date move that forward, to the point that we now don't even need the original complaint to make the case.

And how do you know that??

Well, if you think that you need the whistleblower’s complaint to make this case, guess what??? YOU ALREADY HAVE IT! It’s been available for a while.

Plus, it’s all been confirmed by Trump and his staff. Face it, it’s hard to argue Trump did nothing wrong when Trump’s campaign is still hawking “Get Over It” t-shirts defending “quid pro quo”.

It's snowing in Texas, y'all. :)

I can hardly wait for the response to [124]. Heh.

Wow. If only I had known, I could have included one of my "fun facts." ;)

You must be mad at me, Kick.

Not at all.

Elizabeth Miller?

Yep... and now I am really (not really) mad because I'm getting dinged for using short forms of names as well as long forms!

Well, it's not quite as bad as Ms Miller but, geez ...

Geez! Well, El, I hope you're using that term as a form of respect to the son of God since that is exactly where that short exclamation comes from, you know, Jesus.

There's my "fun fact" for the day. :)

“We don’t know if the whistleblower is of Hispanic or some other unwanted bloodline.”

They are stuck screaming about what they claim is missing from the story, because they cannot discuss (or allow their base to focus on) the information that WE DO KNOW!

They are whining that they aren’t allowed to hear every detail of the investigation being conducted while completely ignoring the information (opening statements of those testifying) that is being released.

But the ULTIMATE irony has to be the Republicans complaining that the Democrats are the only ones who are allowed to call witnesses to testify! Their witnesses would not show up to testify and they know it....so why do they care if they aren’t getting to throw their names in the hat?!? They are complaining for the sake of complaining — nothing else!

I think Pelosi really wanted not to impeach. But Donald just kept pushing the envelope to the point where she had no choice but to open the inquiry.

I think you're exactly right, and I also think all the useful idiots who kept whining incessantly about how they welcomed Trump's impeachment didn't really want to see him impeached, but Trump's actions left them no choice.

It's infinitely easy for all the facts of the matter to get lost in all the daily shenanigans and BS spewage from Trump and the right-wingnut chattering BS brigade, but they have enough to impeach Trump for abuse of power based on the transcript he released and Trump's impromptu pressers and ramblings outside the White House alone, and this argument of theirs that basically amounts to "words have no meaning" is ridiculous.

They have no defense so they're pounding the table... loudly. The President of the United States used taxpayers' money and the Department of Justice to advance his own personal interests as well as those of Vladimir Putin over the conclusions of our own intelligence agencies and over the interests of our allies, and he didn't just do that in Ukraine either.

Well, I was set to impeach and remove after the Helsinki presser with Putin.

Good call and excellent point... because all this is just an extension of all that. And anyone who takes the time to read the transcript of the end of said presser in Helsinki -- immediately following Trump's consultation with Putin -- you will be rewarded with a potential "light bulb moment" wherein you cannot fail to see the similarities of the agenda of Putin and company (which unfortunately includes Trump) and how it mirrors Trump's phone call with Zelensky.

The object of the exercise is and has always been money with these dipshits and the lifting of sanctions on Russia and setting them up wherein there is no impediment to their extraction of fuel from the ground is the primary goal. Everything Trump is doing on the world stage is in the service of Vladimir Putin and geared toward that end. Full stop.

And, you missed [46]. :(

I read them in order and respond when I can... in between TCB. :)

Kick [104] You just wanted to use the word 'Balthasar' as many times as you could in a post. I'm honored.

*laughs*

Well, third time is a charm... so they say.

I thought about going with "Beetlejuice," but I was afraid you'd erupt from the tiny little graveyard and commence to your usual shenanigans. ;)

You must be mad at me, Kick.

Elizabeth Miller? Well, it's not quite as bad as Ms Miller but, geez ...

It's unheard of to have the Intelligence Committee process an impeachment..

The Constitution is clear regarding the impeachment process:

The House of Representatives shall choose their Speaker and other Officers and shall
have the sole Power of Impeachment.

~ Article 1, Section 2 of the United States Constitution

And to those who are whining incessantly regarding the manner in which the House is handling this particular impeachment... too bad because it's in their sole power to do it. Don't like it? Change the Constitution of the United States of America. Good luck with that. :)

Why won't Schiff let Ratcliffe tell what REALLY happened in that appearence???

Prove that Schiff stopped him or that Schiff is controlling all the leaks. You can't. Your claims are as baseless as you are calling EM's.

Because Schiff is afraid that the American people will learn that this is not an impeachment, it is a coup..

Claims not to be able to read Trump's mind while claiming he can read Schiff's. Your arguments are as comical as they are asinine.

And if Democrats continue this course of action, it is going to end badly... And bloody..

Another threat of violence from Mike.

Again, you don't have to take my word for it..

Impeachment is the legal form of assassination..

You should check a dictionary for the meaning of the word "alternative" because you have missed Mr. Frankin's point entirely. Impeachment is neither a coup nor an assassination. What does the spineless GOP and their minions have against our Constitution?

And, if Democrats succeed in assassinating President Trump thru impeachment..

Assassinating Trump isn't possible according to you since Democrats are afraid of firearms and unarmed. Also, remember to look up the word "alternative" and note that it means "different" and not equivalent.

It will go very bad for Democrats..

If Elizabeth Miller would like to take issue with something notable, I think your continual and repeated use of the threat of violence against Democrats on this board is a nice place to start.

And word is, Rep Ratcliffe totally destroyed and decimated Taylor's claims..

From outside the room?

I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ...

CrowdStrike has to do with the 2016 Election..

It's a Russian conspiracy theory that Trump spoke about in Helsinki right after he consulted with Vladimir Putin. Am I making myself clear? Trump is advancing Putin's conspiracy theories wherein Ukraine is blamed for Russia's actions while attempting to kneecap Joe Biden at the same time. It's my definition of turncoat to try to prove Russian conspiracy theories over the conclusions of 15+ of United States' intelligence agencies.

NOTHING is mentioned about Biden til the very end of the conversation and NOTHING in the context of the "favor"..

Well, Trump admitted withholding the funds already and said he'd do it again. Oh, sure, he gave different reasons for it, but nevertheless he admitted it in a tweet and also then asked for China's help on live television, and it's on camera too. Giuliani also admitted it on camera... so there's that too.

Do we look like rubes to you?

ISWYDT.

All Democrats..

So you are believing all the right-wing propaganda BS? And what have we determined that makes you a prime candidate for being?

Funny how NO ONE else was allowed in the room BUT Democrats.

Not funny how you're either a candidate for right-wingnut rube status or you're outright lying on this forum. The only question is which one is it?

Irregardless, it's STILL nothing but hearsay..

You and the spineless GOP politicians seem to be arguing over and over and whining incessantly that words have no meaning. Shitty defense of Trump, I might add.

You seem to forget that all this time, no hearing has been held without Republicans attending and asking questions. And they have what we have.

Another excellent point because one of the dipshits who complained about "not being in the room" has actually been in the room the whole time... that dipshit from the midwest named Dennis Hastert... oops... I mean Jim Jordan... I get them confused because they have practically the same back story. :)

Nice post... sums it up very nicely.

If process is all you've got, Mike, you lose.

Well, you just came along and proved a point I just made. I readily confess I am pleased by this turn of events, but whatever do we mean by "Mike"? Is that our sign of respect. If it is, I must seriously rethink its usage. :)

The problem is Democrats on the whole, were set to impeach on 10 Nov 2016...

Which proves that Democrats really don't care about having any facts or reason.

They just want to impeach and to hell with anything else..

I owe Kick an apology.

Nah. :)

Sorry for jumping on your comment. There was nothing wrong with it. In fact, it was merely an attempt to set the record straight and God knows there is s need for that around here!

Now you're making me feel bad for my other comments I posted before I just now saw this, and for the record, I was just trying to set the record straight in those too. :)

ALL you have to go on is what Schiff is telling you.

There are NO FACTS to support the claim..

BS. The witnesses are supplying their statements, and we know their names.

Their is only Schiff's word and anonymous sources..

Wrong. Those who have been testifying have all been identified by subpoena by name, and they have supplied statements. Then we have Donald Trump saying he withheld money and would do it again and asking China to investigate Joe Biden... on camera. Not complicated.

Please now argue that the POTUS can investigate whomever he pleases for whatever reason; it sounds ridiculous and undercuts all your equally ridiculous arguments that the Obama administration and the intelligence community shouldn't have been investigating the now 150+ discovered and/or admitted meetings that occurred between the Trump campaign and multiple representatives of Russia.

And Schiff has been PROVEN to be a liar so his word is worse than nothing..

So then Trump's word is worse than the nothingness of nothing?

Why won't Democrats have an OPEN and transparent investigation??

The majority of the "I lost count I'm guessing eight Benghazi hearings" were held in the exact same manner. Unless you were whining incessantly that those multiple hearings held over 4+ years were unfair, then no one here need take you seriously.

Because they know they have no facts..

Those cameras Trump keeps standing in front of and that readily available footage produced therefrom and the transcript Trump released are pretty much all the facts needed to impeach him. :)

I'd rather it be non-existent, Joshua. Can it be non-existent, please.

And, pass the pie.

Much of what the whistleblower wrote has been corroborated by witnesses with first-hand knowledge.

Not to mention the transcript of the phone call and the fact that Trump admitted asking Zelensky for help and then publicly asked China for help to investigate Hunter Biden and Joe Biden. Trump did this because he had already asked China and multiple other countries to investigate Joe Biden. Indeed, the Attorney General of the United States is travelling around to multiple foreign countries seeking foreign nations to investigate Joe Biden in the service of Trump who is attempting to absolve Russia, Manafort, Stone, Flynn, etc... just in case you wanted to know the next shoe to drop.

Trump is scared as shit of having to run against Joe Biden and eager to rewrite the Mueller report. These issues aren't seperate, they're intertwined, and Trump will be impeached for his abuse of power. He's not acting in the interests of the United States; Trump is acting in his own interests while simultaneously doing Putin's bidding; it's a common theme with the turncoat, and he's being played like an ignorant fool... on multiple levels in multiple parts of the world.

https://markets.predictwise.com/politics/2020-us-presidential-election

Predictwise still gives Warren the best odds, but she has dropped about 15% in the last 2 weeks. Biden , Bernie and Buti all made substantial gains in this interval at her expense. The chance of any of the dark horses getting the nod is less than 8% split 10 ways.

I believe you missed my point that the whistleblower is no more "virtual" than anyone posting on this board.

And, you missed [46]. :(

And there it is...

The REAL reason for this faux impeachment coup..

And, is your use of "Mike" a sign of respect?

It's something I picked up from Balthasar so you will have to ask him if it is a sign of our respect. I am thinking it's just his name rather than overthinking like "some people."

If not, you probably shouldn't use it.

If Balthasar indeed informs us that it is a sign of our respect, then I definitely probably shouldn't use it.

Let's try to make this a place where the issues can be discussed and debated in a civil and mature manner.

I'm sorry if your nitpicking about Balthasar's name choices got in the way of me discussing political issues. :)

The notion that there’s something inherently wrong with this sort of foreign-aid diplomacy is raising concern among some career diplomats. A former Obama administration State Department official told me that, by controversializing this common practice, “the Democrats are basically hamstringing any future president.” He adds: “That’s why this is a constitutional moment.”
https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/467079-quid-pro-quo-in-ukraine-no-not-yet

Leave it to the Democrats to screw over future Presidents.. :eyeroll:

So, where are ya'all's FACTS of quid pro quo???

Non-existent...

The ONLY thing ya'all have is much MUCH less serious than what Biden did with the Ukrainians when he was Obama's VP...

And if that wasn't quid pro quo, then President Trump's actions were DEFINITELY not quid pro quo..

It's really that simple.. :D

Kick, let's try to eliminate the childish name-calling … please!

I believe you missed my point that the whistleblower is no more "virtual" than anyone posting on this board. The process of whistleblowing to the ICIG is only available to real persons who do indeed work in the "intelligence community."

Our whistleblower works for the CIA, and that's why the complaint was filed with the ICIG: Intelligence Community Inspector General. :)

Yea?? You were also "sure" of the outcome of the Mueller Report, eh? :D

Yer "sure" always seems to be wrong.. :D

The simple fact is, this is all going to blow up in the Democrat's face when they hold the Impeachment vote..

They'll lose..

And I will laugh my ass off for DAYS!! :D

But it doesn't seem to me to be too much to ask that CW spend an hour or two of that time in a discussion of One Demand here in his creation which is sorely lacking and in need of an injection of real life.

I'd rather discuss pie for a couple hours... no nuts... and definitely chocolate pie with some kind of white frothy topping, be it meringue or whipped topping. :p *yum*

It actually doesn't have to. There is no "process" delineated by law to be followed. Liz is correct, however, in that Democrats believe themselves to be in the phase of the investigation, when depositions are held secretly to establish the parameters of it. When it reaches the 'public' stage, you'll see all of it, I'm sure.

When we're talking the legal equivalent of an assassination of a freely, fairly, legally, democratically and Constitutionally elected President Of The United States??

You can bet your bippy I am a fan of precedent... :D

Black Americans won't vote for her and Independents and NPAs won't vote for her...

If you really believe ^^this^^ then you've just described a scenario wherein Warren cannot win the Democratic primary.

Anxiety rises among Democrats worried about party’s prospects in 2020

Happens every 4 years... means absolutely nothing. :)

So they can conduct nefarious activities out of the public/government eye..

Democrats are following the same gameplan..

Which is hilarious since Democrats *CLAIM* that they are against Black Sites and Rendition Safe Houses..

:D

So was Clinton's...

It's unheard of to have the Intelligence Committee process an impeachment..

UN..... HEARD..... OF....

The **ONLY** reason to choose the Intelligence Committee is because they have more secure facilities that can house secret hearings..

Clinton's wasn't..

The investigator for the Clinton impeachment process was an independent counsel who conducted his investigation in private or secret.

Oh com'on, Liz.. Ken Starr's investigation?? Private?? Secret??? Shirley, you jest... :D

The Democrats' actions in this impeachment has no precedent... Period.. Full Stop..

There ya go Liz..

As "factual" as your claim is...

Why won't Schiff let Ratcliffe tell what REALLY happened in that appearence???

Because Schiff is afraid that the American people will learn that this is not an impeachment, it is a coup..

And if Democrats continue this course of action, it is going to end badly... And bloody..

Again, you don't have to take my word for it..

Listen to Benjamin Franklin

"Anyone who wishes to be president should support an impeachment clause, because the alternative is assassination."

Impeachment is the legal form of assassination..

And, if Democrats succeed in assassinating President Trump thru impeachment..

It will go very bad for Democrats..

I’d love to see every candidate that is under 5% in the polls go ahead and throw the towel in — you have no chance this election, and there is always 2024 to start prepping for.

Your wish is partially granted. ;)

It doesn't matter which committee is doing the investigating for this impeachment process because it wouldn't change the fact that investigations are done in private or secret.

The investigator in the Nixon impeachment process was a special prosecutor who conducted the investigation in private - witnesses were then brought back for the public hearings.

The investigator for the Clinton impeachment process was an independent counsel who conducted his investigation in private or secret.

The investigator for the Trump impeachment process is Congress and their investigation is being done in private or secret.

There is nothing wrong with this approach but I think Chairman Schiff and the House leadership could be releasing more to the public or having witnesses return for public hearings etc.

But, I can also be patient for a while longer for the public release of what the investigation has found.

Of course, it goes without saying that there was a problem with leaks in all three of these impeachment proceedings.

So, this begs the question..

Is it wise for the group who are all but disarmed and who are afraid of guns to piss off the group that has 98% of it's members well-armed and well-trained??

Your premise is again flawed. How is it that you can prattle on and on endlessly about gun violence and killing via firearm happening predominantly in cities run by Democrats -- and every time there is a mass killing blame a Democrat for it -- and then come to the conclusion that Democrats are "all but disarmed" and "afraid of guns"? Two words: Cognitive dissonance.

The logic of that somehow escapes me..

As "logic" does for those who prattle on repetitively that those urban dwellers committing the most gun violence are somehow doing it without firearms. :)

}}}}But in the present case, the transcript was provided by the White House - and it absolutely shows that the President tried to manipulate the Ukrainian President.{{{{{

If you truly believe this, then you also MUST believe that VP Biden also committed an impeachable offense by trying to "manipulate" the Ukrainian government by extorting said government with the 1 billion dollar aid package..

I noticed you ignored this..

How come???

Does the blatant hypocrisy you exhibit stick in yer craw???

Regardless...

The fact is, if what President Trump did is quid pro quo and impeachable, then what Biden did is AT LEAST as bad...

It's actually worse, because what Biden did was blatant extortion... And, since Obama hasn't stepped up, it was clearly self-serving extortion and NOT sanctioned by Obama..

Balthy??? Cat got yer fingers? :D

Actually, that is not factually accurate..

I am not sure about Nixon, but I know Clinton's impeachment was handled thru the Judiciary committee and all meetings were public and publicized..

There was no secrecy on the part of the GOP during the Clinton impeachment..

The problem here is that there is no judicial investigation by a special prosecutor or an independent counsel. In this case it is Congress that is conducting the investigation.

But an impeachment is usually handled by the Judiciary Committee... Pelosi tasked Schiff-Head and his Intelligence Committee so that they could do it all in secret..

These are all undeniable facts..

Yes, I'm well aware that you are not the only one around here who has a tendency toward showing {dis}respect to public officials.

"Well, OK.. Just so you know.."
-Vicky Vaughn, BILLY MADISON

:D

There is simply NO REASON for this secrecy other than it allows Democrats to control the flow of information..

I know you know that all investigations, including in the Nixon and Clinton impeachment processes, are done in secret.

The problem here is that there is no judicial investigation by a special prosecutor or an independent counsel. In this case it is Congress that is conducting the investigation.

Is it really too much to ask to refer to him as Chairman Schiff.

It is.. He is a PROVEN liar...

I mean if we can't even be THAT respectful on this blog, then what's the point of commenting here?

Blotus?? Orange DICK-tator??

:D

"The president’s accusers must go beyond hearsay and innuendo and beyond demands that the president prove his innocence of vague and changing charges. They must provide clear and convincing evidence of specific impeachable conduct."

Democrats are doing EXACTLY this.. Hearsay... Innuendo.. Vague... Changing Charges..

There is NO "clear and convincing evidence of specific impeachable conduct"...

If you say Quid Pro Quo is impeachable, then you have to explain WHY it wasn't impeachable when Joe Biden did it??

Is it really too much to ask to refer to him as Chairman Schiff.

I mean if we can't even be THAT respectful on this blog, then what's the point of commenting here?

And if they don't??

There is simply NO REASON for this secrecy other than it allows Democrats to control the flow of information..

This is a BIG BROTHER move pure and simple..

If the facts are as Democrats claim they are, there is NO REASON not to be open and transparent..

Don't believe me??

Maybe you'll believe Joe Biden.

"Bipartisanship should not wait until the matter reaches the Senate chamber"

And word is, Rep Ratcliffe totally destroyed and decimated Taylor's claims..

If that is true, it will come out in public when the Rep. Ratcliffe can reveal it.

Patience is a virtue …

Why can't they provide an open and transparent forum??

I think they will and it seems we may have to until the investigation aspect of this is over.

There's nothing wrong with that approach but I think it would be better if, as they went through the private investigation, they would release as much as they can to the public, including all opening statements. They could also bring back the witnesses for a sort of replay of what happened in camera.

[28] Elizabeth Miller (addressing Balthasar)
And, is your use of "Mike" a sign of respect? If not, you probably shouldn't use it.

I wasn't addressing Balthasar but rather Kick. I think you'll agree that that makes a difference.

You can call me LizM (my old moniker from the lost days of the Huffington Post blog, rip) because I don't believe you have ever used it disrespectfully, have you? :)

This faux impeachment is NOT legitimate...

So says Joe Biden..

What are Democrats afraid of??

Why can't they provide an open and transparent forum??

If Democrats are so sure of their FACTS, they shouldn't be afraid to open up the claims to public scrutiny..

And yet, Democrats are TERRIFIED...

"In the case of an impeachment, fair means bipartisan … Once the election is held, our leaders hold office until the next election. It is simply antithetical to our constitutional democracy to use impeachment to overturn an election on partisan grounds. It violates the independence of the presidency and it usurps the people’s voice."
-Joe Biden

Then you have no problem with Trump asking Zelensky to investigate it, do you?

Irregardless of that, it WASN'T about Biden at all..

False. Demonstrably false.

Your right.. I misspoke..

GOP'ers can be in the room but are not allowed to report what they have seen and heard..

Yet, Dems are free to reveal anything they want..

This asinine statement flagrantly ignores the 15-page written statement by the US Ambassador to Ukraine, one of the most important pieces of evidence in this case and Rep. Schiff had nothing to do with its compilation.

And word is, Rep Ratcliffe totally destroyed and decimated Taylor's claims..

But we aren't allowed to see that because Schiff-head controls the flow of information.

We can only see what Schiff-head ALLOWS us to see..

So we can see how Rep Ratcliffe totally destroyed Taylor's testimony..

Do you see why I tell you that you have no facts?

Because you don't.. All you have is what Schiff-head says and allows you to know..

Pure unadulterated hearsay..

A governmentwide review has acknowledged for the first time that at least several Trump political appointees violated the administration’s ethics pledge, which was put in place to try to “drain the swamp” by imposing lobbying restrictions and penalties.

While President Donald Trump’s ethics pledge was weaker than previous rules, the government ethics office still found violations in 2018 at three federal agencies: the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of the Interior and the National Labor Relations Board.

And it's a big nothing-burger. Right wing talking points. So are issues related to Hunter Biden and Burisma. Formed solely out of the clear blue sky.

But having Ukraine investigate would be a win for Trump in the 2020 election...

Yeah, I avoid rabbit holes.

I suppose that depends on how far down the rabbit hole you're willing to go. There certainly are news stories reporting that the Republican members of the relevant committees were allowed in the room (duh). But when the obvious is rejected out of hand, the entire news media is declared to be an enemy of the people, and presumably the evidence of the believers' own senses is subordinated to the assertions of the Leader and his defenders, what then can constitute a demonstration of anything?

Funny, I see it as the next paragraph that the President speaks. No long pause.

That reminds me: I sometimes label text I quote from you with "LizM" instead of your full name. I hope you don't find it disrespectful. I certainly have never intended it to be.

--

Thanksgiving in the US has been either the last Thursday in November, or the fourth one. (If, for example, the third day of November is a Thursday, then we would have 3, 10, 17, 24, and 30, making the last day of November its fifth Thursday.)

False. Demonstrably false.

Yep.. But you don't continue.

I would like you to do us a favor though
because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it. I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say Crowdstrike ...

CrowdStrike has to do with the 2016 Election..

NOTHING is mentioned about Biden til the very end of the conversation and NOTHING in the context of the "favor"..

As I said.. Your claim is not factually accurate..

Didn't have to. Several people have confirmed that the issue was hot at the time.

Says who??

Schiff?? A proven liar.. But, of course, you believe that because you WANT to believe it.

Do we look like rubes to you? Sure, Trump was just trying to set the record straight for posterity...

I don't presume to read President Trump's mind, but his statements are pretty clear..

Your problem is you believe all the hysterical hype and don't check things out for yourself..

As did several of his colleagues who were in the room.

All Democrats..

Funny how NO ONE else was allowed in the room BUT Democrats.

Irregardless, it's STILL nothing but hearsay..

NO FACTS TO SUPPORT YOUR CLAIMS...

So what's all of this "Schiff says" nonsense?

Sounds more like a publicity stunt than an excuse to me.

Don't know what you're reading, but look at the part that begins with Trump saying, "but I'd like you to do us a favor, though,...

2. The current aid package did not even come up in the entire conversation.

Didn't have to. Several people have confirmed that the issue was hot at the time.

3. Any "favor" that President Trump asked President Zelensky for was in the context of the 2016 election..

Do we look like rubes to you? Sure, Trump was just trying to set the record straight for posterity...

Because Schiff said it was so..

As did several of his colleagues who were in the room.

Has Thanksgiving ever been held in early December?

Don't think it has ever been.. Although to be fair I had to look it up as I thought it was the 3rd Thu as well.. :D

If you truly believe this, then you also MUST believe that VP Biden also committed an impeachable offense by trying to "manipulate" the Ukrainian government by extorting said government with the 1 billion dollar aid package..

And I am sure you DON'T believe that..

Ergo, your claim is solely based on your Party slavery and has little to nothing to do with facts or reality.

Nope.. Fourth Thursday in Nov, same as always..

Not factually accurate...

But in the present case, the transcript was provided by the White House - and it absolutely shows that the President tried to manipulate the Ukrainian President. In fact, the fact that the military aid was being withheld as well is just a bonus multiplier.

Not factually accurate for several reasons..

1. Checking out Biden issues wasn't even mentioned in the part you are referring to.

2. The current aid package did not even come up in the entire conversation.

3. Any "favor" that President Trump asked President Zelensky for was in the context of the 2016 election..

Further, all of the witnesses that we've heard to date move that forward, to the point that we now don't even need the original complaint to make the case.

And how do you know that??

Because Schiff said it was so..

You have no facts to support your claim..

If process is all you've got, Mike, you lose.

Yea, funny thing that..

Ya'all said nearly the exact same thing with regards to ya'all's Russia Collusion delusion.. :D

It was ya'all who turned out to be wrong then.. :D

And Schiff said he had nothing to do with the so-called "whistle blowers" complaint.

And we now know that THAT was a lie...

But, OK.. Let's take the US Ambassador's written statement at face value..

Could you link me to statement and point out the part that is incriminating to President Trump??

Arguing process? You do realize that the process is only in question when new developments beg the question of whether the original has any merit.

But in the present case, the transcript was provided by the White House - and it absolutely shows that the President tried to manipulate the Ukrainian President. In fact, the fact that the military aid was being withheld as well is just a bonus multiplier.

Further, all of the witnesses that we've heard to date move that forward, to the point that we now don't even need the original complaint to make the case.

If process is all you've got, Mike, you lose.

This asinine statement flagrantly ignores the 15-page written statement by the US Ambassador to Ukraine, one of the most important pieces of evidence in this case and Rep. Schiff had nothing to do with its compilation.

Sorry for jumping on your comment. There was nothing wrong with it. In fact, it was merely an attempt to set the record straight and God knows there is s need for that around here!

I freely admit that I am hyper-sensitive about making this a great place for discussion

Says who??

Schiff....

You see your problem.

ALL you have to go on is what Schiff is telling you.

There are NO FACTS to support the claim..

If you can't see that reality, then there is nothing further for us to discuss on this issue, sadly.

I am the only here (sans a few) who DOES see the reality..

And the reality is, there are NO FACTS to support what you are claiming..

Their is only Schiff's word and anonymous sources..

And Schiff has been PROVEN to be a liar so his word is worse than nothing..

Why won't Democrats have an OPEN and transparent investigation??

Because they know they have no facts..

Non-serious.

Much of what the whistleblower wrote has been corroborated by witnesses with first-hand knowledge.

If you can't see that reality, then there is nothing further for us to discuss on this issue, sadly.

Ergo any evidence that flows from said tainted evidence is ALSO tainted..

And, considering the FACT that the nearly sole proponent of said tainted evidence has been caught in several blatant lies...

Once again, in the court of Public Opinion, the public takes that into account.

The Dem's faux impeachment coup is dependent on wining the hearts and minds of the American people.

If the American people realize they have be defrauded and lied to??

Well, it won't go good for Democrats...

We got a little taste of HOW bad it will go with the Russia Collusion delusion..

While it can be argued that an impeachment is not a trial as is traditionally accepted...

It can also be argued that, in a trial of Public Opinion, they public might not like being defrauded and the FOTPT doctrine would still apply..

The Probable Cause is tainted as being nothing but 3rd Party hearsay..

Ergo any evidence that flows from said tainted evidence is ALSO tainted..

"Simple logic"
-Admiral James T Kirk

WHat you call "repitive nonsense" are nothing but FACTS..

You DO realize that Schiff-head has lied on so many things, right?? Hell, even WaPoop awarded Schiff-Head the highest number of Pinocchios...

So, what part of Schiff Lied is "nonsense"???

Fair enough.. Let's just call it a shot across the bow.. :D

And leave it at that.. :D

Because you can't discuss it without tapping out repetitive nonsense.

Yes, you can read.. But you are only reading hearsay.. You are only reading what Schiff-head ALLOWS you to read..

You are not reading the facts..

You are reading Democrat Party "truth"..

And ya know what's really funny??

Schiff-head was all gung ho about having the "whistle blower" publicly testified..

RIGHT up to the point where it was learned that Schiff-head and the "whistle-blower" had coordinated the release of this "complaint"..

THEN ALL OF THE SUDDEN, the "whistle blower" was "in danger" and all sorts of nefarious claims..

Schiff-head has lied about EVERYTHING to date..

Funny how ya'all don't like liars with -Rs after their names..

But you are perfectly accepting of liars who have a -D after their names and who say what you want to hear..

I am all caught up.

Everything ya'all claim to "know" in the here and now has flowed from the alleged whistle-blower...

If the "whistle-blower" is proven to be a fraud, then everything ya'all "know" is inadmissable..

Research the legal term FRUIT OF THE POISONOUS TREE and you'll see what I mean..

As I said, it's what Christine Blasey-Ford tried to do before she was outed..

Democrats learned the lesson well so they are hiding this "whistle blower".. If she even exists...

I can read!