Yeah, "brazen, publid", stupid, foolish, incompetent, idiotic, etc., but likely not unconstitutional or illegal.

It is still illegal to request foreign interference into an election in the United States no matter how many times the old men in Podunk opine that it "likely" isn't. Congress made it illegal so it's therefore illegal... a not altogether difficult concept to grasp.

nancy pelosi and the dem leadership really didn't want to do it.

Exactly!

they thought it would be futile, as it most likely will be. but donald's actions in ukraine were so brazen and public, they had no choice.

Again, exactly.

I did not think Trump would be impeached because I believed Nancy Pelosi wouldn't allow it; however, Trump left her no choice. This impeachment has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with Donald Trump winning the election in 2016 via the Electoral College and everything to do with Trump and his henchmen using taxpayers' dollars to force one of our allies to announce an investigation into one of his chief political rivals in the 2020 election. #SSDD

Balthasar is also dead on accurate in his assessments. You have Perp Trump admitting to his actions on live television... roll tape... and requesting that China also investigate Joe Biden, and nothing John Bolton nor anyone else says after being forced to testify would make the case any stronger or stop the GOP gaslighting of Americans.

Are there more shoes to drop in this saga? You bet your Christmas balls there are. Rick Perry didn't resign immediately for no reason, you know, but those shoes can drop after Trump is impeached for what he's already confessed and doubled down on... and, like Balthy said... let's get those cameras rolling, filming those commercials. The Grievance Old Party has some gaslighting to do, and their job of snowing the rubes isn't going to get any easier.

Meanwhile: If Joe Biden went on national television tomorrow and said: "Vladimir Putin, if you're listening, I will release sanctions on Russia if you'll do me a favor of proffering the kompromat your country possesses on Donald Trump and his White House Senior Advisor and daughter Ivana Marie Trump also known as Ivanka Trump and Yael Kushner and Trump's son-in-law and White House Senior Advisor Jared Kushner"... do you think the GOP dipshits, talking heads, and gullible minions would just shrug that off as "nothing to see here"? I'm guessing "not."

Maybe you should reflect on the following question:

Why is it that candidate/President Trump's senior inner circle entailed a number beyond coincidence of people that are now known to be agents, assets, or fellow travelers of Putin-based organized crime? If you need a start to that list, here are three:

Paul Manafort, campaign chairman, previously backwater lobbyist/fixer in the mold of Duke in Doonsbury, and well connected to Putin and state intellegence through associates and private business dealings.

Michael Flynn, Nat. Sec. Adviser, in spite of warnings from, among others, President Obama and Acting AG Yates.

Rex Tillertson, Sec. of State, in spite of DJT not knowing him, but as Exxon CEO, negotiated a half-trillion USD oil deal with Putin.

Yes, maybe it's as simple as there has been three years of persecution of the President because everyone hates him because he beat Hillary.

Or, just maybe, it has been and continues to be part of the US government's largest counter-intelligence investigation in history.

In other words, it could be that Donald Trump is a victim, or, alternatively, there are reasons why all roads do lead to Putin.

Yeah, "brazen, publid", stupid, foolish, incompetent, idiotic, etc., but likely not unconstitutional or illegal.

i think you're wrong about everything stemming from hillary. that, and merrick garland, and brett kavanaugh, certainly motivated some dems to take their oversight role to an extreme, but nancy pelosi and the dem leadership really didn't want to do it. they thought it would be futile, as it most likely will be. but donald's actions in ukraine were so brazen and public, they had no choice.

JL

Sorry, the decision of constitutionality is not yours to make. If the majority of the Senate says it's unconstitutional/illegal, and ultimately perhaps if the Supremes say it's unconstitutional/llegal, THEN it's unconstitutional/illegal.

As of now, it's NOT "unconstitutional"!

Yeah, I can agree with that, but it's always important to remember what "it" is.

Trump's 'original sin', so to speak, was winning an election that everybody told the Dems that it was inconceivable for him to win, or perhaps inconceivable for Hillary to lose, same thing.

Sure, he's incompetent, sure he's an all-round asshold of a human being, but all that stuff is and always will be, peripheral to that 'sin'.

how about, "many politicians may do it, but donald was dumb enough to get caught doing it in public, so if he's impeached for it, that's his own damn fault." does that idea register?

If Obama did it, it's illegal. Republicants don't fool me. They're whistling past the graveyard. They know just exactly what Trump did, and are looking the other way, because it's Trump.

Once he's gone, the far right will canonize him, and the rest will just move on..

See my [13]

No doubt. Fox world has itself convinced that Donald didn't do what all the evidence says he did, but Joe Biden did do what all the evidence says he didn't. No wonder people are confused.

Very well put!

I wouldn't know about "Fox world", but I really doubt that even Donald's supporters (of which I am NOT one, believe it or not) really think he "didn't do what all the evidence says he did".

I think it's far more a case of "Of course he did it, all politicians do it, and while maybe it ain't exactly a shining example of moral rectitude, it also ain't illegal"!!

Speaking of which, I for one am looking forward to hearing Senator Biden testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee about his role in working with Ukrainian leaders to move their country forward to a better place. I simply can't wait!

Well, this isn't 1974, in more ways than one.

I'll be surprised if support for impeachment/removal rises very far above 50%, pointing up a very big problem that political leaders in your country must deal with finally instead of ignoring to the peril of the republic.

"But, the case is not "ripe" enough to persuade any, if not all, Republicans in the Senate to vote against the president. And, at the moment, it's not enough to move the needle on public support for impeachment and removal. Which is only at 50%, give or take."

Please keep in mind one thing:

That 50 percent support for impeachment AND removal is historically extraordinary!

In the Spring of 1974, only 44 percent thought Nixon should be removed from office.

It wasn't until early August, following the House Judiciary Committee’s recommendation in July that Nixon be impeached and the Supreme Court’s decision that he surrender his audio tapes, did a clear majority – 57% – come to the view that the president should be removed from office.

Are you taking regular walking breaks? Binge TV is not kind to the human body!

Well, we've got what we've got. Our odd of getting any Republicans seems very slim, regardless of what we say.

And we could wait for months for Bolton to be unbound by the courts. I'd say the ball is in his court - if he wants to speak, he has the floor.

Otherwise, we'll proceed. I'd predict the impeachment vote by the full house by Christmas, maybe even Christmas Eve.

Then it's McConnell's baby. He can assemble all of the Republican witnesses, but why? He'd rather have a short court and a down vote in time for Trump's State of the Union address.

Democrats will say, "see that? That's why we need him out, cause it's the only way to stop him".

And they'd be right.

You and I and the other three witnesses today along with most Democrats in Congress and about half of American voters believe that the case is quite clear enough as to what the president has done and that it is impeachable behavior.

But, the case is not "ripe" enough to persuade any, if not all, Republicans in the Senate to vote against the president. And, at the moment, it's not enough to move the needle on public support for impeachment and removal. Which is only at 50%, give or take.

It's going to take more effort on the part of the House committees involved in this to secure the testimony of people like Bolton and the guy that left OMB over the Ukraine aid issue, for two examples.

Nothing good will come from a partisan impeachment vote in the House followed by the same kind of vote for acquittal in the Senate.

And, then what?

I think you're going to need more than TV ads.

But the case is ready. No more needs to be done. Send it to the Senate, let 'em vote, and lets start cutting those TV commercials for next year already!

Who cares how long it takes, especially if it continues through the next election cycle?

I watched it all, too … :)