Then why didn't House Democrats include quid pro quo as an Article Of Impeachment???

Because the PROVABLE and RELEVANT facts did not support the charge..

:D

Funny how that's always the case, eh? :D

I noticed you totally ignored the question..

Do you HONESTLY think that this faux impeachment coup is going to go the Democrat's way..

Why you support this compromised traitor is beyond my understanding.

That's because your "understanding" is solely based on your bigotry and your hate...

We don’t have a “whole faux impeachment coup” going on, Trump was impeached after he used the power of his office to get a foreign government to agree to announce that they were starting an investigation into one of Trump’s political opponents.

Trump ordered money that Congress had allotted as military aid to Ukraine be withheld until their president fulfilled Trump’s demands. Emails released last Friday show that the Pentagon was instructed to hold all military funds to Ukraine less than 90 minutes after Trump finished his “perfect call” with Zelensky.

According to Rule XXV of the Senate Rules in Impeachment Trials, all senators must make the following oath: "I solemnly swear [or affirm, as the case may be] that in all things appertaining to the trial of the impeachment of [the person being impeached], now pending, I will do impartial justice according to the Constitution and laws: So help me God." You want to know if I believe that the evidence that led to the AOI is enough to warrant Trump being removed from office? That all depends on if the Senate lives up to the oaths they will take. If they do, then Trump will be removed.

Trump accepted help from a foreign government in order to get elected in 2016...and he got busted trying to get assistance from a different foreign country for the 2020 election. He has acted on behalf of Russian interests even if it put our national security at greater risk. He sided with Putin over our own intelligence agencies’ intel — humiliating those who serve in our country’s intelligence agencies. Why you support this compromised traitor is beyond my understanding.

Oh, Lord, help us... a person with critical thinking skills; I am gobsmacked, overcome with joy and might faint straight away.

Excellent post and dead on accurate. :)

Still don't see any quote that says opposition research is a thing of value as defined for election law..

Suggestions:

* Get glasses
* Get an education
* Stop arguing semantics
* Stop the pathological lying

I accept your concession.. :D

One cannot accept something that wasn't proffered.

And yet, here you are.. Addressing each and every one of them

Another lie from Mike. I don't address every one of them; I don't even read a whole lot of them. Recognizing your modus operandi and republishing/plagiarism doesn't mean I'm reading all the nicked and republished contents. *laughs*

I accept your concession..

I made no concession and provided a legal memorandum, dipshit. Accept that and stop lying.

And yet, with all that you CLAIM it has, you STILL cannot provide this forum with a SINGLE quote that says what you claim it says..

Cry more! You want to argue semantics? I provided a multiple page memorandum with a buttload of cites. Click the supplied link, and there you have it. I'm not going to single out one cite when there are dozens of them in the memorandum I posted, and I'm also not going to republish a multiple-page memorandum with a shitload of legal citations for a dipshit whining like a toddler for it. Duh!

You mean, like when I predicted Trump would win Pennsylvania & Florida?? :D

Why not? When you "predicted" them, they weren't facts either because predictions aren't facts.

Your circular bullshit is just bullshit.

You said I was wrong then too.. :D

You will find I am eerily consistent when I claim predictions aren't facts because -- drumroll -- predictions aren't facts... ever.

Besides, you keep bragging about your 50/50 predictions... as if that's some big damn deal. Keep it up, though, it lets everyone on the forum know just how inherently needy you are of attention... very Trumpian in your constant peevish neediness to be noticed... denotes a very low self-esteem and projects exactly the opposite of what you think it does, but I digress.

When it comes to PRESIDENT Trump, my predictions have a funny way of turning into facts..

I see you are qualifying your shitty predictions now that John M recently called you on them and I quickly added two more. Don't force me to post a link to that proof and your concession of your shitty predictions.

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/11/22/ftp552/#comment-149839

Oops. I accidentally quickly found that comment and mistakenly posted it... slipped; I won't let it happen again... in 2019.

Don'tcha just HATE that.. :D

No offense, but you're not worth it... but no offense, no one is worthy because hate requires passion and clouds one's critical thinking abilities. I've seen no evidence of real hatred on this forum except, of course, the guy who keeps projecting his hatred onto others and suggesting repeatedly that people commit suicide... all while claiming expertise as a "law enforcement officer"... no wait... a "career field of Public Safety." *laughs*

and that is why the quid pro quo may matter. it is clear evidence that an announcement of an investigation into joe biden and hunter biden was worth 391 million dollars in military aid (and a white house visit) to all parties involved.

that's the value.

JL

...

etcetera.

Question for you: Do you think that the House chose not to list specific criminal charges in their AOI was to prevent Trump from claiming Double Jeopardy if the DOJ plans on charging him once he is removed from office?

Nah. I think Rafael Cruz is lying about there being no allegation of a crime because there are several. Cruz knows the law but is now reduced to spewing the Party line. How do we know Cruz knows it's wrong?

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/donald-trump/ted-cruz-course-trump-was-wrong-ask-china-probe-bidens-n1065536

A. He's on record, see link above.
B. He's a lawyer and politician who knows election law.
C. A + B equals Cruz is a Trumpian gaslighter and con.

Impeachment is a legal process as well as a political one. You know good and well that will be argued if a former president is charged with a crime that they were impeached on...and it is not a bad argument to make.

If Cruz were Trump's lawyer, of course. As it is, Cruz is just spewing the Party line. If one takes the time to read the Articles of Impeachment of each of the presidents, you will find identical language and no actual citing of United States Criminal Code or Federal Statutes. Cruz is lying. Read Trump's Articles, and you will find he is being alleged to have committed crimes.

There is no legal precedent since we’ve never had a former president indicted on charges stemming from their presidency.

What Andrew Johnson was primarily impeached for was violating the Tenure of Office Act by attempting to replace Secretary of War Stanton while Congress was not in session. Clinton was impeached on Article One and Article Three, lying and lying, while two of the Articles of Impeachment that passed the Judiciary Committee failed in the House.

This is why I think they chose not to include Mueller’s list of Trump committing obstruction of justice in their AOI.

I think they were trying to keep it simple versus throwing every thing he's done into the mix.

It also supports the reasoning behind my crazy hunch that the Republicans and Democrats are working together to remove Trump from office without him catching on until after it is a done deal!

I wish! Don't think so, though.

Why else would McConnell announce to the world that he was throwing the trial before it even started?

McConnell's announcement was meant for the Republican base since his approval ratings are similar to the Republican Governor of Kentucky who just got booted out of office last month.

Only reason that makes sense is that it was said to calm Trump’s fears and assure him that he was not going to be removed from office. I think Trump will be in handcuffs the moment he is out of office.

I think he's definitely looking at an indictment or three if he leaves office with a pulse. Handcuffs? Nah.

I know it might just be wishful thinking,

Glad to hear that. ;)

but it is the only way I can explain the blatantly horrible job the Republicans have done at defending Trump’s actions and why they would even bother to defend him at this point.

I hear you, Russ. Nothing wrong with believing the best in people and that a Party you used to belong to hasn't surrendered every ethical bone in their body -- including their spinal columns -- to Benedict Donald Trump. But the majority of them have willingly donated their spines to political science and are now complicit in the con... witness Rafael "Ted" Cruz.

Everything they have done has been to pacify the big orange baby — it’s been a performance for one that’s all show and no substance.

Some of their cover-up and complicity involves GOP perps, but those guys are slowly landing in prison too. The wheels of justice turn slowly, but those wheels are still attached to a wicked big bus. :)

I accept your concession.. :D

And yet, here you are.. Addressing each and every one of them

:D

Funny how that is, eh? :D

The GOP is completely and 100% in control of Senate impeachment proceedings.. This is FACT.

Still a lie and shall remain a lie no matter how many times you post it.

I know you posted on this forum that "Section 3 states that the Senate 'shall have the sole Power to try all Impeachments,'" but you seem utterly clueless regarding the meaning of that snippet you quoted from the United States Constitution. It doesn't mean the Majority Party of the Senate shall have the sole Power to try all impeachments, it means the entire Senate.

Ask yourself these questions:

* If the (quoting you) "GOP is completely and 100% in control of Senate impeachment proceedings," wouldn't the Constitution mention the GOP or at the very least the "Majority Party"? Doesn't it clearly state "the Senate" in the Constitution?

* If the "GOP"... a.k.a. the Republican Party... emerged in 1854 (it did), how did the Framers make the "GOP completely and 100% in control of Senate impeachment proceedings" in the United States Constitution that was written/ratified in 1787/1788... even before the existence of the GOP?

* Why has McConnell met multiple times with Schumer to formulate procedure for the trial if the (quoting you) "GOP is completely and 100% in control of Senate impeachment proceedings"?

Am I making myself clear yet?

You were wrong.. You simply can't admit it..

Nothing to admit since the GOP is obviously NOT completely and 100% in control of Senate impeachment proceedings.

Have a happy.. :D

I always do. You too. Catch up on some reading... starting with the Constitution of the United States. I do not think it means what you think it does.

Still waiting for you to give me the FEC law that defines information as something of value..

You keep asking for "FEC law"... as if its magical/special versus the entirety of United States Code containing federal statutes. Law isn't limited to "FEC law" contained in Title 52 and Title 26 of the United States Code.

Anyway, I already posted what you and Stucki keep asking for. You piled onto the post I made to him which contained what you're asking for and stated nobody ever posts what I had posted in the post you were piling on.

There are multiple pages of small font footnotes with case upon case where information is defined as "a thing of value." There are a lot of legal cites in there wherein Courts have defined information as a "thing of value"... despite all protestations and pathological lying to the contrary.

Don't let me down.. :D

I already didn't. It's been posted for multiple hours spanning multiple days already.

Anyone who posts as much information as you do that keeps on prattling and whining that information isn't a thing of value must admit that their posts are the most worthless on the forum.

Tough...

Yes I do..

So??? :D

I accept your concession..

I've posted the link again above, and there is a shitload, a plethora, a cornucopia, a veritable Santa's bag of toys worth of legal precedence cited in it whether

And yet, with all that you CLAIM it has, you STILL cannot provide this forum with a SINGLE quote that says what you claim it says..

Funny how that ALWAYS is the case with you.. :D

Normally I do.. Normally I just CnP the paragragh or 2 I am commenting on..

Incorrect. You're routinely using multiple comment boxes to in effect republish near-entire or entire articles by cutting them up in pieces.

How does one "accidentally" post a near-entire or entire article that spans multiple comment boxes? You routinely post the cite in the first comment box and then use multiple comment boxes with no attribution in order to republish the remainder of the article. #SSDD

Since you have proven you have comprehension issues, I'll clarify.

I don't have comprehension issues. I'm not the idiot who keeps tossing out an argument that is the equivalent of "words have no meaning." Your argument is one of semantics and nothing more.

Cite the FEC law that states information is defined as a "thing of value"...

The FEC isn't the Alpha and Omega of statute in America. I've posted the FEC laws on this forum ad nauseam. Look them up. Additionally, I've already posted what you're asking for in a link at [52] above.

Do you need your nose rubbed in it or need it spoon-fed to you like a toddler?

https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2019-10-ELW-the-law-of-a-thing-of-value.pdf

You want me to quote the entire legal memorandum? Only a selfish dipshit would use the comments section of another man's blog to in effect republish the work of another person. So if the link I already posted isn't good enough for you, I can assure you I'm not in the habit of republishing the works of another person like a common troll.

I've posted the link again above, and there is a shitload, a plethora, a cornucopia, a veritable Santa's bag of toys worth of legal precedence cited in it whether or not the rubes and citizens of Podunk acknowledge its existence.

It's NEVER been cited here because there is no such definition of the law..

Even Russ admitted that..

Face reality sunshine.. You have NO FACTS to support your claim that opposition information is defined as "something of value" under FEC law.

NONE.. ZERO.... ZILCH... NADA....

Cite the law...

Pound sand. It's been cited a shitload of times all over this forum, and the GOP argument that amounts to "words have no meaning" only works on:

* Rubes
* Liars
* Partisan hacks
* Useful idiots
* All of the above

So which one are you?

With President Trump til Jan 2025.. And with the GOP in complete and utter control of Senate Impeachment proceedings...

Agreed.. :D

Nice of you to make shit up and then agree with something I never said, but thank you for proving my point... you are ever the little helper these days in the "assist" department.

You mean, like when I predicted Trump would win Pennsylvania & Florida?? :D

You said I was wrong then too.. :D

When it comes to PRESIDENT Trump, my predictions have a funny way of turning into facts..

Don'tcha just HATE that.. :D

Irregardless of that fact, President Trump will be re-elected..

Predictions aren't facts... especially predictions like yours. :)

If you choose to call it nonsense, that's your choice..

State the obvious.

But what you call it does not make it any less factual..

I am not constrained to point out that it doesn't make it any more factual either because predictions obviously aren't facts. :)

“This is the first time in the history of our country that a president has been impeached without a single article alleging any criminal conduct. Democrats don’t allege any crime, they don’t even allege any federal law that was violated. This was at the end of the day a political response because Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats hate the president.”
-Senator Ted Cruz

Rafael Cruz lies. One needs simply read the Articles of Impeachment wherein the Democrats allege multiple crimes. While I don't expect everyone reading it to recognize the crimes contained therein, Rafael is a lawyer so it takes a special kind of blatant lying for him to claim there are no crimes alleged. Typical GOP Trumpian con and gaslighting, but here we are.

It did..

You just refuse to see it because you hate President Trump and you hate it when he always wins.. :D

The same person who claimed to have been in law enforcement for over two and a half decades, and then called me a liar and said that I was making it up when I repeated his claim of 25 years as a LEO.

I never said I was 25 years an LEO.. I have specifically stated on more than one occasion that I was Military, Security, FSO and LEO...

I have 25 years in the career field of Public Safety..

But, of course, you spin that and twist it to support whatever complete bullshit and lies you want to tell at any given moment...

But, it's OK.. Your come-uppance is that you always LOSE and President Trump always wins.. So, in the end, I am always the happy one and ya'all (NEN) are always the ones covered in yer own bullshit.. :D

I'll ask again..

Do you HONESTLY believe that this whole faux impeachment coup is going to go the Democrats' way??

Honestly??

No.. The Senate should ignore Left Wing spin and bullshit in that regard...

You keep talking about the Senate as if there are no Democrats in it... clue in, Bubba Trump!

That's how Odumbo and the Dumbocrats tried to play it..

Your deflection lands with a thud and a tacit admission of Russ's point. You're practically calling yourself a hypocrite and saving Russ the trouble; how very nice of you.

The only "crimes" that have been committed are in the fevered hate-fill fantasies of the Democrats and Trump/America haters.

There are multiple people sitting in prison right now that say otherwise and several guys packing and heading there fairly soon. I lost count.

Democrats could find ANY crimes to charge President Trump with so they simply made shit up..

Yes, correct, Democrats could find ANY crimes, and Republicans could too were it not for the fact they're complicit in the cover-up and ignoring the facts in already in evidence. Gaslighting and conning the American public is the Trumpian way, but it hasn't kept any of Trump's cronies out of prison yet, even Gates who sang like a canary.

You make shit up because you cannot handle that President Trump beat every thing Democrats threw at him..

Says the person who constantly claims that the Mueller report TOTALLY EXONERATED TRUMP OF COLLUSION!

The same person who claimed to have been in law enforcement for over two and a half decades, and then called me a liar and said that I was making it up when I repeated his claim of 25 years as a LEO.

“Once again, you are a liar... So live with that dipshit” — Michale

All good points, but you'll just confuse them with facts!

Hey, Russ, if I didn't know any better, I'd say the GOP talking heads and useful idiots were full up to their eyeballs in shit when they kept whining they wanted Hair Dick Tater to be impeached. ;)

So, you concede you have absolutely NO FACTS to support your claim that opposition research is defined as a "thing of value" as specified in FEC law..

Thank you for your concession....

First you concede that Obstruction of Congress is not a crime.

Now you concede that opposition research is not defined as a "thing of value" under FEC law..

There is hope for you yet, my friend.. :D

Also, Trump only wanted the Ukrainians to announce they were investigating Biden

Facts to support?? No??? Of course not..

presuming he is the nominee, he didn't lose your vote, right? ;)

Heh.

You can't because no law says that.

WOW! You are repeating what I just told you while ignoring what was being stated completely! Great defense!

I know that no law lists every thing that is considered to be a “thing of value”...it not only would be redundant but also impossible to name every possibility. Does opposition information have any value to a campaign? Of course it does, so asking a foreign government to provide it to your campaign is against the law.

Also, Trump only wanted the Ukrainians to announce they were investigating Biden — they weren’t asking for opposition info.

Question for you: Do you think that the House chose not to list specific criminal charges in their AOI was to prevent Trump from claiming Double Jeopardy if the DOJ plans on charging him once he is removed from office?

Impeachment is a legal process as well as a political one. You know good and well that will be argued if a former president is charged with a crime that they were impeached on...and it is not a bad argument to make. There is no legal precedent since we’ve never had a former president indicted on charges stemming from their presidency.

This is why I think they chose not to include Mueller’s list of Trump committing obstruction of justice in their AOI. It also supports the reasoning behind my crazy hunch that the Republicans and Democrats are working together to remove Trump from office without him catching on until after it is a done deal! Why else would McConnell announce to the world that he was throwing the trial before it even started? Only reason that makes sense is that it was said to calm Trump’s fears and assure him that he was not going to be removed from office. I think Trump will be in handcuffs the moment he is out of office.

I know it might just be wishful thinking, but it is the only way I can explain the blatantly horrible job the Republicans have done at defending Trump’s actions and why they would even bother to defend him at this point. Everything they have done has been to pacify the big orange baby — it’s been a performance for one that’s all show and no substance.

You make shit up because you cannot handle that President Trump beat every thing Democrats threw at him..

It's really THAT simple..

CITE THE LAW that states that opposition information is a thing of value..

You can't because no law says that.

You are wrong and you just can't admit it..

The law states that it is illegal for a campaign to seek or receive any thing of value from foreign governments. Do you honestly think that legislators need to list every single thing that could potentially have value in order for the law to be enforceable? This is your brilliant defense of Trump?!!? Why not just argue that the law does not specifically name Trump as someone who cannot ask foreign governments

Here’s one way you can tell if something is considered to be a “thing of value” in our legal system — if you have to request it, it has value!

I am surprised at how stupid you are willing to look because you are stuck desperately trying to defend Trump’s blatant crimes.

Absolutely gabber-flasting.. :D

The GOP is completely and 100% in control of Senate impeachment proceedings.. This is FACT.

You were wrong.. You simply can't admit it..

Have a happy.. :D

Still waiting for you to give me the FEC law that defines information as something of value..

Don't let me down.. :D

Also, there are already existing rules, which rules state in no uncertain terms that the House opens and closes the impeachment:

XXII. The case, on each side, shall be opened by one person. The final argument on the merits may be made by two persons on each side (unless otherwise ordered by the Senate upon application for that purpose), and the argument shall be opened and closed on the part of the House of Representatives.

~ Rule XXII

https://tinyurl.com/yx5zu5yq

Let's Be Honest(TM): First and last say in the impeachment proceeding doesn't exactly sound like "no say" in the proceedings... unless you're a dumb ass, of course. Obviously, the Senate could always vote to change the existing and longstanding rules by simple majority, but the Senate does indeed have members of both parties and not merely the GOP.

Have a great day, Kick. :D

I always do. Note my link containing the longstanding Senate Procedure rules regarding Impeachment... so you could learn something. It's never too late to educate.

Education: The gift that keeps on giving. Happy Christmas. :)

As usual, you are wrong.. Notice I don't stoop to your childish name-calling.

I wouldn't be one to boast about my not stooping to "childish name-calling" if I was the guy who constantly tossed out the term "Trump/America haters" on a near continual basis and without abatement, but "haters gonna hate"... or so the kids say these days.

I also wouldn't exactly be patting myself on the back for my not stooping if I was that "paragon of virtue" who suggested that my political opponents should commit suicide en masse:

If Democrats are looking for suggestions, I would suggest they consider the Jonestown option.. :^/ ~ Michale

http://www.chrisweigant.com/2019/12/18/the-federalist-papers-number-66/#comment-150361

Would it be too repetitious to point out the fact that self-awareness isn't exactly the strong suit of the GOP and their seemingly clueless group of talking heads and useful idiots? Oh, well... it bears repeating since they're infinitely clueless at seeing in themselves what they claim in others... very Trumpian-like projection. I mean, what kind of dumb ass would refer to everyone else on the forum on a near-constant basis as a "hater" yet pat himself on the back and claim he doesn't use childish names? Asked and answered.

The GOP is in control of the Senate Impeachment proceedings.. House Democrats have NO SAY..

Again, for the quite obvious incorrect persons... a.k.a. dumb asses: The Senate is in control of the impeachment trial -- explained simply in the United States Constitution -- but if the Senate consisted of 100 members of the GOP, you'd be correct in saying that the GOP was in control of the Senate Impeachment proceedings, but they're not... so you're not.

continued...

"Thank you, Q. I always knew you were on my side..."
"Uhh... No... Actually, I'm the one that got ya kicked out"
-STAR TREK:TNG, Deja Q

:D

Normally I do.. Normally I just CnP the paragragh or 2 I am commenting on..

But every once in a while, my CnP will twitch and copy the entire article.. And I don't notice till after I have already hit SUBMIT..

Apologies.. it's not intentional...

In comment #102, start reading at This is no surprise. There is no such thing as “obstruction of Congress” as a high crime — or even a low crime. and my response should make more sense..

Even PELOSI admits that President Trump has not been impeached yet.. :D

Verdict: Trump wins again.

Honestly, what MORON would think that OBSTRUCTION OF CONGRESS is actually a crime???

Apparently, all the morons in the Democrat Party..

Democrats couldn't prove bribery, couldn't prove quid pro quo, couldn't prove extortion..

Couldn't prove ANYTHING...

So, they just make shit up.. Just like their laughable COLLUSION "crime".. :D

Democrat Party = Keystone Cops :D

But then something remarkable happened. As soon as Pelosi had Trump where she supposedly wanted him, skewered by impeachment, she reversed course. Within minutes of her victory in delivering a one-party vote, she announced that the House would not transmit the historic articles of impeachment to the Senate for trial anytime soon. The problem? Well, it seems Pelosi found something more urgent than impeachment — Christmas break. (Someone get Chevy Chase on the phone. He can’t pull off Nancy Pelosi, but he will be perfect as bumbling Joe Biden. Isn’t it time for a sequel to “National Lampoon’s Christmas Vacation”? Maybe “Impeachment Takes a Holiday”?)

Funny how something that was vital to the nation became no big deal when urgency was political-agenda inconvenient..

This faux impeachment coup is a debacle for Democrats from the start.. :D

Dressed appropriately in black, she engineered the third impeachment of a president in United States history on a party-line vote with little evidence and a magical mystery timeline that oscillated between “clear and present danger” and “no big deal.”
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/12/23/impeachment_takes_a_holiday_--_starring_nancy_pelosi_142014.html

Result... President Trump wins again.. :D

I'll be here all day.. :D

Cite the FEC law that states information is defined as a "thing of value"...

Cite the law...

It's funny..

Funny, eh? :D

I just posted a link crammed full of legal examples, and the law isn't complicated.

It's like "Obstruction Of Congress" or "Collusion"...

Another strawman argument from the righties... surprise not surprise.

Everyone CLAIMS it's an illegal thing, yet not a single one can provide ANY facts to support the claim..

FEC law claims it's illegal. It's not even complicated unless you're ignorant of the law, and unless you're blind, I just posted a link crammed full of legal examples.

With President Trump til Jan 2025.. And with the GOP in complete and utter control of Senate Impeachment proceedings...

Agreed.. :D

According to your interpretation, if Putin (or for that matter, some Russian callgirl) were to say to Trump "Good luck with your election", or "I'm pulling for you", or "I hope you win your election", or even less likely, "I'll be praying for you", that would constitute a "Thing of Value".

There's no need for a pathetic strawman argument when you've been given a link crammed full of legal cites as examples. Republicans' idea of debate these days is to invent ridiculous strawman arguments and generally fabricate lies.

It's lazy and so very Trumpian... a real commentary on the depths to which the GOP and many of their ilk have allowed themselves to sink... to just continually make shit up, gaslight, and con: The Grand Old Prevaricators.

Try rejoining the world of reality, you will become much less vulnerable to PTSD syndrome!

The GOP's idea of reality these days is not somewhere I'd allow myself to sink; I'm fine here on Earth 1. :)

Things just keep getting better and better.. :D

Democrats and Trump/America haters???

Not so much... :D

Dumbocrats are whining and crying that GOP Senators have declared support for President Trump and won't be fair & impartial..

What about the DIM Senators who have called for President Trump's removal from office?? What about all the nasty and unfounded attacks from DIM Senators???

Are THEY "fair and impartial"??

Of course not.

As I said at the beginning and NO ONE has refuted..

GOP Senators will be as fair and impartial as Dumbocrats have been..

Don't like it? Tough shit.. Dumbocrats shouldn't have started this faux impeachment coup..

Why didn't Democrats just go thru the courts to obtain the evidence??

Because they knew they would lose..

The courts would have sided with President Trump over executive privilege...

That's the problem with this whole faux impeachment coup..

It wasn't based on anything but hate of President Trump..

It was the Russia Collusion delusion all over again..

Democrats figured that, if they investigated, they would HAVE to find some dirt.. Enough dirt to convince the American people and the GOP..

But Democrats were lazy and didn't want to be bothered with due process...

And now they are on the LOSING end of this whole faux impeachment coup..

Do you know how we know this??

Because CW has been commentarying on everything and anything other than this faux impeachment coup debacle..

If things were going good for Dims, we would be seeing daily Rah Rah Impeachment commentaries, even with all the end of the year stuff...

But there isn't any Rah Rah Impeachment stuff because it's going very VERY badly for Democrats..

Once again, President Trump has the upper hand and Dumbocrats are being decimated..

Even by their OWN experts! :D

How laughable is that..

The GOP is in complete and utter control of the Senate Impeachment proceedings..

PERIOD.... FULL STOP....

And Democrats are paying a HUGE political price for their stoopidity..

It's really THAT simple...

Which is not really relevant to the point now, is it?

They only accused Trump of doing what they could prove he had done.

Because the “rough” transcript that Trump did release clearly showed Trump doing everything he is being accused of in the Articles of Impeachment, then the charges are not only warranted — they are justified.

There ARE no charges..

THAT'S the point..

Seriously, dood.. You DO know that you are going to lose, right??

You DO know that President Trump is going to be thoroughly and utterly vindicated and exonerated, right??

You DO know that this is all going to end very badly for Democrats, right??

-Senator Ted Cruz

You’d think a Harvard grad would know Impeachment does not require federal criminal laws being violated in order to occur.

What good would accusing Trump of violating a federal law do when the DOJ has argued in court that it is their position that the President cannot even be investigated for any crime committed while in office???

How could Democrat’s have charged Trump with criminal offenses that he can prevent anyone from truly investigating? Trump has refused to allow anyone who might have witnessed and/or have direct knowledge of him committing a crime from testifying against him to Congress. Trump has placed the full transcript of the phone call with Ukraine’s President Zelensky into a secure server typically reserved for only the most guarded intel to prevent it from being released.

How would the Democrats prove that the evidence supports criminal charges being brought when they are refused access to the evidence? They could not, so they did not accuse him of violating federal criminal law.

They only accused Trump of doing what they could prove he had done. Because the “rough” transcript that Trump did release clearly showed Trump doing everything he is being accused of in the Articles of Impeachment, then the charges are not only warranted — they are justified.

Joe Biden just lost the election, assuming he is the nominee...

A debate answer is not an election... assuming you have a brain cell. :)

I mean, seriously..

You expect to be taken seriously when the majority of your shit is fiction? Good luck with that.

For those few here who AREN'T blinded by hysterical hate and bigotry..

Well, that leaves you out since you're constantly wishing death to democrats and those who disagree with your dipshittery, and it doesn't get anymore hateful than that.

Think about it..

You're asking others to do something you refuse to do yourself. Typical.

Let's say you are accused of a crime..

Because you filed that motion to suppress, NOW you are charged with OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!!!???

Ordering people not to testify to Congress or produce documents (which is ordering them to break the law) and refusing to produce documents to Congress (against the law) isn't remotely the equivalent of requesting that a Court order certain facts/documents already in evidence be excluded from consideration in a case.

Is THAT the kind of America ya'all want to live in???

I want to live in an America where no one is above the law and there is no one who can refuse to answer to We the People by ignoring our requests for documents and ordering other citizens to ignore We the People's elected representatives in the House. Our Founding Fathers declared their independence from a monarchy already and set up our co-equal branches of government for a reason.

"THE ARROGANCE IS MIND-BOGGLING!!!!"

Your ignorance is too. :)

This entire impeachment is illegitimate from start to finish...

What do you have against the United States Constitution? You should read it.

“Impeachment as contemplated by the Constitution, does not consist merely of the vote by the House, but of the process of sending the articles to the Senate for trial. Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution: The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment.

If the House never sends the articles then Trump could say with strong justification that he was never actually impeached.”
-Noah Feldman

So much for impeachment being a "sure thing".. :D

According to the Democrats' own expert, President Trump has NOT been even been impeached.. :D

I'de rather be asleep.. :D

But until that miracle of miracles happens.

I gots ta call 'em as I sees 'em.. :D

“Any action that forces us to litigate . . . will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice.”
-Adam Schiff

So what's your problem with that?

If you exercise your rights under the US Constitution, that's considered "Obstruction Of Justice" according to Dumbocrats??

Obviously Schiff was referring to "executive privilege"... specifically Trump's idea of not having to answer in any way to Congress and Trump's refusal to answer to Congress and ordering subordinates and American citizens to ignore production requests and subpoenas.

Executive privilege isn't mentioned anywhere in the United States Constitution. You should really read that thing versus making shit up that doesn't exist in it.

We did sacrifice.. We put up with 8 years of Obama..

Biden will be the Democratic nominee or Trump will be re-elected.

One is not dependent on the other..

Biden may or may not be the nominee..

Irregardless of that fact, President Trump will be re-elected..

Now, I won't suffer anymore nonsense on this from you, okay?

If you choose to call it nonsense, that's your choice..

But what you call it does not make it any less factual..

"Just the fax, ma'am"
-John McClane, DIE HARD 2: DIE HARDER

Quote the part of the link that says that.

You can't because it says nothing of the sort..

And, of course you understand that what is lost can often be replaced with something even better, no?

Biden will be the Democratic nominee or Trump will be re-elected.

Now, I won't suffer anymore nonsense on this from you, okay?

PERIOD...

FULL STOP...

That is all

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/464227-fec-chairwoman-reiterates-illegality-of-soliciting-campaign-help-from

Well, according to the Chairwoman of the FEC, a candidate directly requesting information on an opponent from a foreign government is a violation of the law. Not that this will convince you, that much is clear.

Okay, just because you break them up into multiple boxes, you still continue to abuse the author's comments section by posting near-entire and entire articles written by right-wingnut fantasy and conspiracy theory morons.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) opened the farcical impeachment debates with a speech invoking American history, including the Battle of the Bulge during which Americans overcame a surprising Nazi counterattack to prevail ultimately in World War II.

I have another comparison for the speaker; Napoleon Bonaparte in Moscow. On September 14, 1812, Napoleon led his Grande Armée into Moscow with the expectation that the Russians would surrender. After a month with no surrender, Napoleon began a long retreat that ended in the loss of approximately 90 percent of his force and the eventual defeat of France.

It's comical how a whole bunch of the right wing QAnon nuts, Tea nuts, neo-nuts and torch carriers got their tan pants in a twist because Nancy Pelosi dared to ding their precious Nazis, and there is no shortage of the Trump Trash on Brietbart and 8Chan and the like whining about it and singing the praises of Moscow and Vlad in their responses.

So much whining grievance, hatred, and worship of dictators coming from the righties; it's creepy, but here we are.

Democrats' best course of action is to simply let the matter die it's ignoble death..

The impeachment is done and lives on forever... there is no death for "in perpetuity."

Pelosi should do a presser and simply say, "We were just kidding"

But they weren't kidding so why would she do that?

It's a foregone conclusion that Democrats have lost ANY chance for the White House..

Nope.

There is ZERO chance that Democrats can nominate anyone that can defeat President Trump.

Equally as stupid as the prior comment.

I would also say it's virtually guaranteed that Democrats will lose the House as well..

Where have we heard endless prattling on and on of a Red Tsunami before? Oh, right! Your ridiculous drivel.

On the other hand, there is a slight (VERY SLIGHT) glimmer of hope..

Let the back-peddling begin... a whole one sentence later.

Anyone wanna lay any bets that Democrats can do it??

You're on, and you've already lost the bet. Democrats can already retain the House. Will they retain the House is another matter. Democrats can retain the House, and I think they will. Republicans in the House seem to agree.

House incumbents who have announced their retirement from public office:

Republicans

AL-02 Martha Roby
FL-03 Ted Yoho
FL-19 Francis Rooney
GA-07 Rob Woodall
GA-14 Tom Graves
IL-15 John Shimkus
IN-05 Susan Brooks
NC-02 George Holding
NC-06 Mark Walker
NC-11 Mark Meadows
NY-02 Peter King
MI-10 Paul Mitchell
OR-02 Greg Walden
TX-11 Mike Conaway
TX-13 Mac Thornberry
TX-17 Bill Flores
TX-22 Pete Olson
TX-23 Will Hurd
TX-24 Kenny Marchant
UT-01 Rob Bishop
WI-05 Jim Sensenbrenner

Democrats

CA-53 Susan Davis
HI-02 Tulsi Gabbard
IA-02 Dave Loebsack
IN-01 Peter Visclosky
NY-15 Jose Serrano
NY-17 Nita Lowey
WA-10 Denny Heck
_______________

Retirements by incumbents generally signal the Party lawmakers believe will control the House; the insiders are predicting Blue.

That's a lot of Republican incumbents quitting. Poor guys, looks like they don't relish being in the minority. Sure, some of them are in "safe" gerrymandered seats, but a whole lot more of them aren't. :)

Democrats have lost and lost big...

You are arguing that the Senate should ignore Trump once again seeking help from a foreign government in interfering in our elections.

No.. The Senate should ignore Left Wing spin and bullshit in that regard...

If the Republicans are successful, then a President can violate any law he wishes to while in office without fear of being held accountable for his crimes....just as long as he has popular policies and the economy is strong!

That's how Odumbo and the Dumbocrats tried to play it..

Yer just pissy because President Trump actually makes it work.. :D

The only "crimes" that have been committed are in the fevered hate-fill fantasies of the Democrats and Trump/America haters.

Democrats could find ANY crimes to charge President Trump with so they simply made shit up..

JUST like they did with the Russia Collusion delusion..

Face reality, my friend..

At ever turn, at every juncture, Democrats lost.. President Trump wiped the floor with them..

You better be prepared for 4 more years of President Trump with the power of a full GOP Congress behind him..

:D

presuming he is the nominee, he didn't lose your vote, right? ;)

I am as good as my word.. He'll get my vote if he is the nominee, but it won't do him any good.. :D

You are arguing that the Senate should ignore Trump once again seeking help from a foreign government in interfering in our elections. That the Senate should not be expected to take the Impeachment trial seriously; that there is nothing wrong with pre-determined jury verdicts that ignore the relevant evidence completely!

But the economy is doing so incredibly well, unemployment is at record low numbers...so you claim that these things should mean something in judging Trump’s fitness to lead us.

The vagueness of the “abuse of power” article is effectively a “mal-administration” charge rejected by the Constitution’s Framers because it would so easily be used to attack presidents over policy differences.

Just as “mal-administration” was rejected by the Constitution’s framers as a way to attack presidents over policy differences, citing Trump’s successes should not play any role in the impeachment process as well! Trump was not impeached simply because he isn’t good at his job, there are specific actions that Trump committed that make up the charges listed in the Articles of Impeachment.

If the Democrats are successful, all presidents henceforward will be impeached whenever the opposition party achieves power in the House.

If the Republicans are successful, then a President can violate any law he wishes to while in office without fear of being held accountable for his crimes....just as long as he has popular policies and the economy is strong!

presuming he is the nominee, he didn't lose your vote, right? ;)

As usual, you are wrong.. Notice I don't stoop to your childish name-calling.

The GOP is in control of the Senate Impeachment proceedings.. House Democrats have NO SAY..

PERIOD...

FULL STOP...

As usual, you are wrong..

You should read the Constitution of the United States and stop posting your bullshit spin and misinformation.

You should read my comment and stop posting your bullshit spin and misinformation.

Have a great day, Kick. :D

The GOP is in control of the Senate Impeachment proceedings. House Democrats have NO SAY... PERIOD.. FULL STOP

Wrong, dumb ass. The Senate is in control of the impeachment trial. You should read the Constitution of the United States and stop posting your bullshit spin and misinformation.

My family is here for the holidays, so let me take this early opportunity to wish you and your family a wonderful holiday season.

It's funny..

After 2 years of claiming that opposition info is a thing of value, NO ONE here can point to the election law that states this..

Funny, eh? :D

It's like "Obstruction Of Congress" or "Collusion"...

Everyone CLAIMS it's an illegal thing, yet not a single one can provide ANY facts to support the claim..

According to your interpretation, if Putin (or for that matter, some Russian callgirl) were to say to Trump "Good luck with your election", or "I'm pulling for you", or "I hope you win your election", or even less likely, "I'll be praying for you", that would constitute a "Thing of Value".

Try rejoining the world of reality, you will become much less vulnerable to PTSD syndrome!

"As president, would you be willing to sacrifice some of that growth, even knowing potentially that it could displace thousands, maybe hundreds of thousands, of blue-collar workers, in the interest of transitioning to that greener economy?'"

Joe Biden answered quickly and boldly... "YES"

Joe Biden just lost the election, assuming he is the nominee...

For those few here who AREN'T blinded by hysterical hate and bigotry..

Think about it..

Let's say you are accused of a crime..

You file a motion to suppress the evidence, due to it being obtained illegally..

And NOW......

Because you filed that motion to suppress, NOW you are charged with OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE!!!???

Is THAT the kind of America ya'all want to live in???

"THE ARROGANCE IS MIND-BOGGLING!!!!"
-General Hank Landry, STARGATE SG1, Continuum

This entire impeachment is illegitimate from start to finish...

Get that???

If you exercise your rights under the US Constitution, that's considered "Obstruction Of Justice" according to Dumbocrats??

THAT is what ya'all's Democrat Party has become??

And, ya'all are on board with this!!???

Are you fraking KIDDING ME!!!????

The Democrats have their impeachment. There will be no Trump surrender. There’s nothing left for them to do but begin the long retreat.

"DOMINATION!!!!! FLAWLESS VICTORY"
-Mortal Kombat

Senate Leader McConnell just ate the Democrats' lunch...

Time to pack it in, Democrats.. Ya'all lost..

"What are ya'all still doing here?? It's over.. Go home.. Go on... Go..."
-Ferris Beuhler

The House can follow whatever process it chooses for impeachment. But it is now attempting to dictate how the Senate discharges its duties. The House has made a “demand that this body redo House Democrats’ homework for them. That the Senate should supplement Chairman Schiff’s work to make it more persuasive.” Further, the House could effectively swamp the Senate whenever it wants by passing flimsy impeachment articles to force a Senate trial.

I mean, com'on people..

Did ya'all HONESTLY think this would end any other way???

Ya'all knew from the start there was no case.. ya'all knew from the start that the Senate would never actually convict President Trump.

And now that we're hear ya'all act so shocked and indignant..

How else did ya'all think this would end???!??

“It’s not a constitutional crisis for a House to want more information than a president wants to give up,” McConnell said. “That’s not a constitutional crisis! It’s a routine occurrence. Separation of powers is messy—by design. Here’s what should have happened . . . either the president and Congress negotiate a settlement or the third branch of government, the judiciary, addresses the dispute between the other two.”

McConnell totally DECIMATES the Democrats' faux impeachment coup..

TOTALLY... :D

There could be no more efficient takedown of the Democrats’ impeachment effort than the short 30-minute speech delivered by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) the day after Democrats passed the articles.
https://amgreatness.com/2019/12/20/mcconnell-crushed-impeachment-in-one-30-minute-speech/

This faux impeachment coup of the Democrats' is dead in the water..

Pelosi has been out-gunned, out-manned and out-maneuvered by President Trump and Senate Leader McConnell..

Democrats' best course of action is to simply let the matter die it's ignoble death..

Pelosi should do a presser and simply say, "We were just kidding"

It's a foregone conclusion that Democrats have lost ANY chance for the White House..

There is ZERO chance that Democrats can nominate anyone that can defeat President Trump.

ZERO... ZILCH.... NADA.... NONE....

I would also say it's virtually guaranteed that Democrats will lose the House as well..

On the other hand, there is a slight (VERY SLIGHT) glimmer of hope..

If Democrats can quit their hysterical hate obsession on President Trump, accept that President Trump is the freely, fairly, legally, democratically and Constitutionally elected President Of The United States and work WITH said freely, fairly, legally, democratically and Constitutionally elected President Of The United States for the betterment of all Americans...???

If Democrats can do all that..

There is a slight glimmer of hope that they can retain the House..

Anyone wanna lay any bets that Democrats can do it?? :D

No??? Didna think so.. :D

#50 & #53...

Exhibit C

Democrats don't really hate President Trump as much as I think they do??

The facts say otherwise...

Trump is remaking the federal judiciary
WASHINGTON - After three years in office, President Donald Trump has remade the federal judiciary, ensuring a conservative tilt for decades and cementing his legacy no matter the outcome of November's election.

The 13 circuit courts are the second most powerful in the nation, serving as a last stop for appeals on lower court rulings, unless the case is taken up by the Supreme Court. So far, Trump has appointed 50 judges to circuit court benches. Comparatively, by this point in President Barack Obama's first term, he had confirmed 25. At the end of his eight years, he had appointed 55 circuit judges.
https://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Trump-is-remaking-the-federal-judiciary-14924789.php

Shirley, ya'all jest... :D

How Trump Won 2019

Oh, look. A moron attempting to spin being impeached as a "win"... after all the endless prattling and predictions about how it wasn't going to happen. What better proof that someone needs to have their head extricated from their anal orifice?

President Trump ends 2019 in a better position than when he started. The year began with the swearing in of Nancy Pelosi as speaker of the House.

Because Trump lost the House in a Blue Wave despite all the ridiculous predictions of a Red Tsunami that was allegedly on the horizon because of all that "black support" and his numbers being the "same as Obama's." Winning! *shakes head*

The Mueller probe dragged on.

Because Trump obstructed justice on at least 10 occasions and refused to cooperate with Mueller and destroyed evidence, etc., as outlined in no uncertain terms in the Mueller Report which is a 10-lane map to Obstruction Highway. Winning! *shakes head*

The legislative agenda of Trump's first two years in office had petered out.

Winning!?

The Democratic frontrunner, Joe Biden, was beating him by double digits in the polls.

Winning!? So Trump broke the law and sent his lawyer to Ukraine and used taxpayers' dollars and multiple federal employees and elected officials in an attempt to coerce an announcement from the newly elected President of Ukraine in order to smear Biden and involve yet another foreign entity in America's democracy.

A little more than halfway through the year, bond prices signaled recession.

So? Winning?

Look where things stand now. Pelosi's decision to impeach Trump already has cost her a seat and stands zero chance of resulting in a Senate conviction.

One whole seat where Trump had lost 40, which Blue Wave losses caused Nancy Pelosi to regain that big fat gavel she used to impeach Trump with. Big whoop and so what? The GOP attempting to spin the gain of one itty bitty seat as "winning" only proves that the earlier claim of 40 seats not being a Blue Wave was lousy GOP spin... way to undercut your prior argument, and thanks for that admission, GOP dumb asses.

Not only has Mueller shuffled off the stage,

But Mueller's multiple Appendix D case spin-offs live on (heavily redacted), are still alive and well and continuing robustly, but don't take my word for it... ask Roger Stone... convicted of all charges and lost bigly and heading to prison for lying, witness tampering, etc. More coming too.

but Michael Horowitz's report on FBI malfeasance also raises serious doubts about the credibility of the government and media elites who spent years arguing that Trump and his associates were Russian agents.

Wrong... Russian assets... assets... big difference... so get your bullshit straight, m'kay, and spinning Michael Horowitz's report as a win for Trump can only be described as pure GOP fiction since it proved Trump lied, lied, and lied... poor QAnon dipshit conspiracy nuts on the lunatic fringe.

Mitch McConnell blocks liberal bills from the House while confirming additional conservative judges.

Same shit different year.

Biden is damaged

Because Trump and his lawyer (the lawyer not already in prison) broke the law yet again in an attempt to interfere in the democracy of the United States because Trump was having his ass handed to him in the polls (as pointed out by the GOP dipshit, see above).

because he and the problems of his candidacy manifest as he sleepwalks toward his party's nomination.

Yet still defeating Trump easily in the polls you keep mentioning, and if the GOP thinks Biden "sleepwalks," then that denotes their belief that Trump is unconscious and crawling.

The economy is gangbusters.

Not really any different than when Trump took office, though. Sure glad Trump hasn't effed it up.

Nothing the Democratic majority has done has hurt Trump's approval rating.

I beg to differ.

At this time last year, he stood at 42 percent approval and 52 percent disapproval in the RealClearPolitics average of polls.

Right after Trump had his ass handed to him and lost 40 seats in the House with about the same poll numbers you're bragging about now.

As I write, the RCP average of Trump's approval rating is 45 percent and disapproval is 52 percent.

And you're giddy with delight about a 52% percent disapproval rating?

Trump's numbers are remarkably stable and closely track President Obama's at this point in his presidency.

Like I said... the same "numbers" he lost a shitload of House seats with... remarkably stable shitty numbers, and Trump claims his economy is so much better than Obama's... so having the same remarkably stable shitty numbers doesn't sound too good to me.

Biden began the year with big leads over Trump.

Biden is also ending the year with big leads over Trump.

Since then his margin has dwindled to 4 percent.

Nope.

And that's before Trump drops $1 billion in negative social media on him (or whoever the nominee is) next year.

Nice fantasy you got there, moron GOP dipshit, but I would wager Trump will be running against Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, "the Squad" and socialism regardless who wins the Dem nomination... so there's that. :)

President Trump had a very very VERY good 2019..

First the loss of the House, then the loss of the entire State of Virginia, then Kentucky and Louisiana, and all kinds of his friends winding up in prison, Roger Stone headed there too and the same remarkably stable shitty poll numbers. You just know when they write the history books, they'll be talking about what a great year Trump had in 2019, you know, the year he was impeached on two counts and a bunch of his campaign associates got convicted of felonies.

2020 will see President Trump re-elected... :D

2020 will see Roger Stone being sentenced and will likely see Trump's lawyer (the one not already in prison) being indicted for crimes he performed at the request of President Trump... you know... a kind of lather, rinse, repeat scenario from what we saw in 2019.

Thank you for that walk down memory lane; it turns out I remember 2019 a whole lot different than a GOP dipshit.

My advice for the Trump Trash in 2020 is: Quit your incessant whining like aggrieved victims, and don't bet against the astronaut. :)

How about two solid yrs of being told that I was too stupid to understand the legal definition of "a thing of value", and being perpetually assured that the Orange Moron was a foreordained 'goner'?

If by "goner" you mean removed from office, you're simply lying. Unless I missed the post, there is no one on this forum who has made a comment that they believed Donald Trump would be removed from office. Many of us are also on record that we didn't even think Trump would be impeached; however, he we are. I didn't think Nancy Pelosi would allow it, but then Trump left her no choice and proved me wrong when she most certainly did allow it.

You kept insisting it wasn't illegal to "get dirt" on your political opponent from a foreign government, and multiple posters and the author of the blog pointed out the fact on multiple occasions that you are wrong... the statute exists without abatement or amendment since we began discussing it. Newsflash: It's still a statute and still illegal... no matter how many times the Podunk Pervert claims that it isn't.

As for your insistence that "dirt" isn't a "thing of value," you're still wrong about that too. You want cites for the legal definition of a "thing of value"? I won't even make you beg:

https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/2019-10-ELW-the-law-of-a-thing-of-value.pdf

Seems like totally sufficient evidence to me.

You didn't produce any evidence... just a faulty recollection from the mind of skeevy perverted old man who has a reputation for prattling on and on endlessly about "penises."

In Other Related News

The day Noah Feldman was testifying in Congress under oath about the impeachment of their Orange Cult Worship, the right-wingnut moron brigade were attacking his Wikipedia page and frantically trying to discredit him. They made multiple spurious claims, even going so far as to claim Feldman is the nephew of Jeffrey Epstein.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/noah-feldman-jeffrey-epstein/

A few days later, the right-wingnut talking heads, rubes, morons, and whiny little bitches are comical to watch as they bend and fall all over themselves to accept Feldman.

“Both parts are necessary to make an impeachment under the Constitution. The House must actually send the articles and send managers to the Senate to prosecute the impeachment. And the Senate must actually hold a trial.

If the House does not communicate its impeachment to the Senate, it hasn’t actually impeached the president. If the articles are not transmitted, Trump could legitimately say he wasn’t truly impeached at all.”
-Democrats' Impeachment Expert Witness Noah Feldman

Nice quote; I'm guessing you didn't supply a link to the original article because it would prove without doubt you're incorrect.

President Trump has not been impeached yet...

This is fact...

That is an opinion... not to be confused with a fact. In fact, it would be a lie to call it a fact.

Bloomberg Opinion

By Noah Feldman
December 19, 2019, 3:35 PM CST

Noah Feldman is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist. He is a professor of law at Harvard University and was a clerk to U.S. Supreme Court Justice David Souter. His books include “The Three Lives of James Madison: Genius, Partisan, President.”

Read more opinion [link]

Follow @NoahRFeldman on Twitter

Now that the House of Representatives has voted to impeach President Donald Trump, what is the constitutional status of the two articles of impeachment? Must they be transmitted to the Senate to trigger a trial, or could they be held back by the House until the Senate decides what the trial will look like, as Speaker Nancy Pelosi has hinted?

The Constitution doesn’t say how fast the articles must go to the Senate. Some modest delay is not inconsistent with the Constitution, or how both chambers usually work.

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2019-12-19/trump-impeachment-delay-could-be-serious-problem-for-democrats?srnd=opinion

Feldman's opinion includes the quote you are incorrectly referring to as a "fact." You will note that even the link to Feldman's opinion contains the "=opinion" designator at the end.

Interestingly the article explains who Feldman is and provides a link one can invoke where they can "read more opinion."

Must you be spoon-fed with the definition of the word opinion? *laughs*

continued...

Hmmmmmmmm

That sounds REAL familiar...

Where have I heard that before?? :D

The GOP is in control of the Senate Impeachment proceedings. House Democrats have NO SAY... PERIOD.. FULL STOP

This was known from the VERY start that this is the way it would be..

If Democrats didn't want to play by the Constitutional rules, they shouldn't have started this faux impeachment coup...

Shades of Herman Cain's "9-9-9"? Heh.

No, silly... longing in anticipation for the CW FTP 555... oh where is my 555? ;)

Exhibit B

These aren't outliers..

These are MainStream Left Wingers...

Star Fleet? Gimme a break.

Exhibit A :^/

Really??

Given the fact of the total blowout that was the Russia Collusion delusion and how that lead directly to this faux impeachment coup debacle..

I'de say if anything, the hate is UNDERESTIMATED..

at least between his being elected and taking office, most folks i know were holding out genuine hope that he'd be more successful at governing effectively than he's ended up being.

And yet, not a SINGLE one of those types are here, eh?? Well, sans you, of course.. :D

The problem is President Trump has been VERY successful at governing, as the great economic news and low LOW HISTORICALLY LOW unemployment numbers show.

It's just that no one here wants to give him any credit for it..

They laughably try to spin it as it's Obama that made it happen. OBAMA!!! The moron who claimed it never COULD happen!!! Ironic, eh? :D

but i know for certain that she was reflecting a feeling that a vast portion of the left sincerely holds.

I see no evidence of that beyond lip service.. And even the LIP SERVICE of that is sparse..

I would love to be proven wrong.. Find me some examples of Weigantians giving President Trump credit where it was/is due..

The only one that comes to mind was when CW credited President Trump with the most significant anti-gun legislation since the mid 80s..

Ironically enough, I thought President Trump was totally wrong about it..

Go figger eh? :D

You wanna know how bored I am??

I am actually watching a WESLEY episode of TNG!!!

ACK!!! How the mighty have fallen.. :D