It’s gone beyond partisan differences. Removing Trump is now our patriotic duty.

i'm going to try to save you ( :

Personally, I do look at evidence. For example: Bill Clinton DID obstruct justice and was guilty of perjury. However my my feelings about what he did aside. He WAS guilty as charged.
As much I as a person I dislike Trump as a person, every bit of his impeachment is on partisan leanings.
No one should be held guilty based on what another 'heard'. THINK of the implications. Doing this is nothing more than a reenactment of the Salem witch trials.
Again, don t care for the man, though do care about true justice...
I have more, would love to debate though this will be buried

He’s not guilty yet because the trial hasn’t taken place yet! And it needs to be a fair one.

If that is your position, then would you support Trump testifying personally? (And recall: Clinton necessarily did not become guilty of perjury until *after* he testified.)

And what about the Zelensky call transcript? These are Trump’s words released directly from the White House: no hearsay, no spin, no BS.

First off, thanks for answering.
Second, I love a good and true debate especially with one that "always" have their convenient facts at hand. 😎
That aside, must say that as someone that lived through those truly trying and the beginning of partisan times...I never cared about what he did as that was personal choice. What I did care about was how dragged out the truth, spent millions of taxpayer dollars for what? In effect nothing

Well, what seemed shocking and appalling in those days (an Oval Office BJ) now seems utterly mundane in retrospect with a thrice-married President with a trophy wife who judged beauty pageants, bragged about grabbing pussies and literally paid off pornstars to keep them quiet during a campaign.

What we know about Trump’s meddling in Ukraine shows this is worse than Watergate, in my opinion. Election theft back then was as simple as wiretapping and breaking and entering. Now it involves withholding billions in Congressionally-appropriated military aid from a sensitive geopolitical region in order to blackmail them into digging up election dirt on a political opponent’s son.

The contours of this election scandal are more difficult to understand than a simple act of burglary, but they are no less shocking to the conscience.

The Ukraine scandal is the culmination of everything the Mueller Report hinted at, x100.

And if Trump gets away with it, you bet he will interpret that as a green light to do much more next time.

In repsponse to this, did the Clintons engage in payoffs to say, Jennifer Flowers, to keep quiet during his campaign? They also, from my recollection, nail John Roberts for the same thing?
Please. There is no moral high road with any candidate

Trump isn’t even being impeached for that. I just mentioned it is passing as part of the backdrop.

When your guy looks like Clinton on sexual issues (the #1 thing Republicans used to attack him for), then it’s not looking good for you.

And again: Trump is not even being impeached on any sexual stuff.

Now, in regards to President Trump.
Is he someone I like? No
Is he someone I trust? No
Is he guilty of the Impeachment articles? No
In my opinion, was an investigation into corruption that also has an impact into a political rival advantageous? Yes
These questions must be asked
I, for one, want a FULL investigation to include all witnesses. Bush and Obama era too.
I want everyone that wasn't called in tbe closed door, Democrat only investigation to be heard. Only then can we, as Americans truly form am opinion. Until then, I will stand by the elected President no matter what.
Btw, why did an elected representative, Talib, say "impeach that mf'er' before assuming office if "this is for the good of country" Pelosi. Looks a bit partisan to me and not even including the 2 year Mueller report, another waste of taxpayer dollars....

Btw, since we're supporting allegations, should we look at Hunter's dealings in China while his Dad was VP?

We don’t really get to make this about Hunter Biden when presidential conduct is at issue.

Presidents don’t get to swing wide against political opponents’ families wherever they may find them around the world, tying up billions in vital military aid in the process, all on the basis of little or no evidence.

Whatever you think Hunter Biden was, he plainly wasn’t a national security threat the type of which would justify the personal involvement of the Commander-in-Chief.

In addition to being undemocratic and destabilizing, endorsing Trump’s approach to “fighting corruption in Ukraine” (but in reality: just one alleged case of it) is simply illogical, as the President has neither the time in his day nor the background or expertise to be the lead investigator on a subject as complex as international corruption.

If Hunter Biden is guilty of anything (and I’ve seen no solid evidence that he is), then it’s a task for the Chinese or Ukrainian authorities, and possibly our FBI. Not POTUS. He has, or should have, other things to do.

In regards to conduct, since when does a political opponent's actions not been called into question? Example: John Roberts (almost voted for him). Example2: creditability for and against Ross Perot in 1992 (I did vote for him) then 1996. A later to be Impeached Bill Clinton for perjury and obstruction by his own admission. Tell me please why Trump is guilty without any trial?

As I said below, we need a fair Senate trial to determine Trump’s guilt. There’s evidence that would support a conclusion that he is. And as you pointed out, Clinton was found guilty of perjury. *After* he testified. Trump hasn’t testified yet so we’re sort of comparing apples and oranges here.

The trial will only have a chance of being fair if Trump stops obstructing, allows key officials to testify (Giuliani, Mulvaney, Pompeo, etc.), and testifies himself.

I concur in that a trial should be conducted. Though not limited in scope to what one party wants as I have many questions. Please bear with me on this...
1) Why did the Democratic party hold closed door hearings in the first place if they deem him guilty? (Personally would have shouted to the rooftops)
2)If 100% Guilty, why hold back instead of submitting the articles immediately? That's their job. (The Senate holds the rules of trial, that's their job and should be held accountable of any whitewash which is the job of an informed electorate)
3)On a a completely different topic...Why in the HELL has neither a Republican or Democratic majority in the House figure out how to balance the dang budget for the past 10 years?

1. Because it's typical for the House to designate a committee to evaluate the evidence. Contrary to what almost every Republican said, those close door committees were not only constitutionally viable but procedural justifiable. And Republicans had representation in those closed door proceedings.

2. They're holding back because Mitch McConnell has confessed to doing everything in his power to see that Trump will not be impeached. Claiming the Democrats have turned this into a partisan political process. It's convenient that after Democrats played by the rules, that Republicans called foul from day one in order to control the narrative that their own partisan reactions are justified.

3. Last 20 years. Because we've been at war and because the people have lost trust in the government after the Bush administration used 9/11 to justify taking away the rights of the American people and the Obama administration did nothing to remedy that despite promising otherwise.

You also state that Hunter Biden isn't guilty due to a lack of evidence. Though you are ready to convict a person without any supporting evidence, while intentionally ignoring the evidence against the person they are accusing?

There’s quite a bit of evidence against Trump. It’s laid out here, along with the dissenting views.

https://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20191216/CRPT-116hrpt346.pdf

I’ve seen nothing like this on Hunter Biden, and also not any suggestion that he’s actually actively under investigation by any authorities either in Ukraine or the U.S.

A quick Google search turns up this paternity case in Arkansas and that’s about it. Having a child out of wedlock does not justify the personal involvement of POTUS. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/hunter-biden-subject-to-criminal-investigation-court-filing-claims-as-alleged-mistress-demands-custody-of-child.amp

Despite all the evidence that’s already been uncovered, no, I don’t think Trump should be convicted until after a fair Senate trial. All the key witnesses who still haven’t testified still need to, including Trump himself.

Sorry, looks like I replied to an earlier post. Please look up. Thanks

I appreciate the time you've taken to respond to me. In response to this is to point out that allegations against Trump may, in fact, be true, and, like you should be fully investigated in a Senate trial with ALL witnesses being heard.
As for Hunter, he and Joe should also be investigated. Also Kushner for insecure communication as Manhattan made me aware. Not Ivanka at this moment as his article suggested she changed habits on being made aware

Btw, your comment also supports a partisan attack on a sitting President by a partisan Congress. Just saying

Err.. Meme

Considering you didn't respond to the comment below. Exactly, for the sake of argument and debate, were my comments stupid or shite?

Stupid? No. Does the narrative fit, yes in that Trump asked a foreign government to investigate corruption from the USA. Would that benefit him politically? Yes. However, should we, as a nation, look at all aspects of corruption, foreign or domestic?

Absolutely. Through the proper channels. Trump violated his oath of office by abusing his power.