Happy Impeachment Day!

[hoorta]

41 minutes ago, calfoxwc said:

Bill Clinton

The Clinton White House was mired in two major scandals involving Whitewater and Monica Lewinsky. During these investigations, President Clinton used executive privilege 14 times, which included protecting First Lady Hillary Clinton from testifying during the Whitewater hearings and protecting himself from testifying in both cases.

His executive privilege claims, as well as his attorney-client claims in the Lewinsky investigation, were challenged in federal court. Citing U.S. v. Nixon, the courts determined that the prosecutor’s needs outweighed the confidentiality of executive documents and discussions. This ruling was not appealed to the Supreme Court, as the White House sought to avoid a headline-grabbing legal loss.

Clinton was eventually impeached by the House but not convicted the Senate, allowing him to finish his second term.

LOL Cal the Republicans claimed  the same obstruction crap on Clinton, and now say it's perfectly OK for Trump to pull the same garbage.

God, you guys have your heads so far up Trump's ass it's unbelievable....  

1 hour ago, tiamat63 said:

You think you're going to get 50% of these tards to vote 3rd party, then you're hitting that J too long.      Time to pass it over this way.

Nope, all it will take is a solid Democratic vote along with a fair share of Moderate Republicans along with a few Independents who hate Trumps guts to swing the election the other way. To this point there's no viable 3rd party candidate, and I suspect voting "none of the above" will count as a vote for Trump. In case you forgot, Trump lost the popular vote, and the only reason he won is folks hated Hillary more. #Never Trump. FWIW, any Republican who isn't Donald.... 

There's a reason Trump went  after Biden- because he rightly surmised Joe as a far bigger threat to his reelection than either Sanders or Warren. The religious right has no use for Pete- not because he's gay, but he'll 100% push the outer limits of the LBGT crowd. 

[tiamat63]

11 minutes ago, hoorta said:

LOL Cal the Republicans claimed  the same obstruction crap on Clinton, and now say it's perfectly OK for Trump to pull the same garbage.

God, you guys have your heads so far up Trump's ass it's unbelievable....  

Nope, all it will take is a solid Democratic vote along with a fair share of Moderate Republicans along with a few Independents who hate Trumps guts to swing the election the other way. To this point there's no viable 3rd party candidate, and I suspect voting "none of the above" will count as a vote for Trump. In case you forgot, Trump lost the popular vote, and the only reason he won is folks hated Hillary more. #Never Trump. 

There's a reason Trump went  after Biden- because he rightly surmised Joe as a far bigger threat to his reelection than either Sanders or Warren. The religious right has no use for Pete- not because he's gay, but he'll 100% push the outer limits of the LBGT crowd. 

There are plenty of viable 3rd party candidates.  Just not enough people with the principle or bravery to cast their vote for them.

[Vambo]

[Vambo]

Media's glee over impeachment could have Trump 'laughing all the way to re-election': pundit

[Vambo]

How impeachment became a money magnet for Trump campaign

[mjp28]

19 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

See y'all at the trial...

Impeachment? Trial? What channel is it on, I must have missed that.  

 

[Westside Steve]

3 hours ago, tiamat63 said:

You think you're going to get 50% of these tards to vote 3rd party, then you're hitting that J too long.      Time to pass it over this way.

Fine with me as long as plenty of the tards on your side vote for AOC or Bernie or or Elizabeth Warren or whoever the hell. 😹

Face it 3rd party candidates have been a little bit shaky and not, in my opinion, worthy of pissing away the chance to have somebody closer to your own views.

WSS

[Westside Steve]

1 hour ago, tiamat63 said:

There are plenty of viable 3rd party candidates.  Just not enough people with the principle or bravery to cast their vote for them.

Like whom?

WSS

[tiamat63]

16 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

Like whom?

WSS

I'll work on this ^^^^

17 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

Fine with me as long as plenty of the tards on your side vote for AOC or Bernie or or Elizabeth Warren or whoever the hell. 😹

Face it 3rd party candidates have been a little bit shaky and not, in my opinion, worthy of pissing away the chance to have somebody closer to your own views.

WSS

When you finally wrap your head around the bolded part that I've been telling YOU since I began reading this board- I am not a registered democrat, I am not a liberal, I have not voted for a democrat in any national level election. That would include Obama ( not like he was a "liberal" though)  I'm like a parent that has to tell the child half a dozen times because for whatever reason it isn't registering with you. I have NO side.  And if I did, it certainly wouldn't be with those clowns.     I don't think you're an idiot, and I'm not "mad bro" as I type this.  I genuinely need to understand if you're having trouble processing the things you read from me.  

Repeat this back in your head.   Then, at your earliest convenience, type it out, or copy and paste....   I don't give a damn, 10 times in a row in a response.   Do that.... and then maybe we'll get to potential candidates I have my eye on.              But I'm not having a dialogue with anyone who can't even begin to grasp the very basics of things I've said... Christ knows how many times now......?       And if you're going to say that I've never mentioned my 3rd party preference, my disdain for Repubs and Dems,  or that you just haven't paid attention (yet somehow you're going to lump me in with the other dearly departed on this board) then the only thing saving you from the ignore list is that mod tag.     

 

[Westside Steve]

19 minutes ago, tiamat63 said:

I'll work on this ^^^^

When you finally wrap your head around the bolded part that I've been telling YOU since I began reading this board- I am not a registered democrat, I am not a liberal, I have not voted for a democrat in any national level election. That would include Obama ( not like he was a "liberal" though)  I'm like a parent that has to tell the child half a dozen times because for whatever reason it isn't registering with you. I have NO side.  And if I did, it certainly wouldn't be with those clowns.     I don't think you're an idiot, and I'm not "mad bro" as I type this.  I genuinely need to understand if you're having trouble processing the things you read from me.  

Repeat this back in your head.   Then, at your earliest convenience, type it out, or copy and paste....   I don't give a damn, 10 times in a row in a response.   Do that.... and then maybe we'll get to potential candidates I have my eye on.              But I'm not having a dialogue with anyone who can't even begin to grasp the very basics of things I've said... Christ knows how many times now......?       And if you're going to say that I've never mentioned my 3rd party preference, my disdain for Repubs and Dems,  or that you just haven't paid attention (yet somehow you're going to lump me in with the other dearly departed on this board) then the only thing saving you from the ignore list is that mod tag.     

 

Don't be coy. In this case you know damn well I mean the people on your side who can't stand Trump.

So you pick an independent that you're throwing your weight behind and take it from there. I'm going to guess that he won't be to the right of the Republican party, just a hunch.

Right or wrong?

WSS

[MLD Woody]

1 hour ago, tiamat63 said:

I'll work on this ^^^^

When you finally wrap your head around the bolded part that I've been telling YOU since I began reading this board- I am not a registered democrat, I am not a liberal, I have not voted for a democrat in any national level election. That would include Obama ( not like he was a "liberal" though)  I'm like a parent that has to tell the child half a dozen times because for whatever reason it isn't registering with you. I have NO side.  And if I did, it certainly wouldn't be with those clowns.     I don't think you're an idiot, and I'm not "mad bro" as I type this.  I genuinely need to understand if you're having trouble processing the things you read from me.  

Repeat this back in your head.   Then, at your earliest convenience, type it out, or copy and paste....   I don't give a damn, 10 times in a row in a response.   Do that.... and then maybe we'll get to potential candidates I have my eye on.              But I'm not having a dialogue with anyone who can't even begin to grasp the very basics of things I've said... Christ knows how many times now......?       And if you're going to say that I've never mentioned my 3rd party preference, my disdain for Repubs and Dems,  or that you just haven't paid attention (yet somehow you're going to lump me in with the other dearly departed on this board) then the only thing saving you from the ignore list is that mod tag.     

 

As you said that's always been a constant for certain people on this board. It's easier to just assume anyone that disagrees with you on one thing must be "the enemy" and disagree with you on everything. Easier to put them in a box. If you always vote straight ticket and refuse to even think otherwise, you'd assume others are the same. 

[Vambo]

[MLD Woody]

I think Hallmark showed an add with a gay couple though guys. I think that's where the outrage is supposed to be right now.

[Westside Steve]

1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

As you said that's always been a constant for certain people on this board. It's easier to just assume anyone that disagrees with you on one thing must be "the enemy" and disagree with you on everything. Easier to put them in a box. If you always vote straight ticket and refuse to even think otherwise, you'd assume others are the same. 

You should pick the candidate or candidates that most closely espouse the platform's you support. That's all there is to it. If that's a third-party candidate vote your conscience but be aware that will probably split the vote and had the election to the candidate you at least agree with. 

That's the way I see it. I don't think anyone can convince me I'm wrong unless your vote it's only meant as a personal moral victory.

WSS

[Westside Steve]

4 minutes ago, MLD Woody said:

I think Hallmark showed an add with a gay couple though guys. I think that's where the outrage is supposed to be right now.

I would vote for mayor Pete over AOC or Elizabeth Warren in a heartbeat.

But I know it excites you to pretend it's a big deal.

WSS

[Westside Steve]

5 hours ago, hoorta said:

LOL Cal the Republicans claimed  the same obstruction crap on Clinton, and now say it's perfectly OK for Trump to pull the same garbage.

God, you guys have your heads so far up Trump's ass it's unbelievable....  

Nope, all it will take is a solid Democratic vote along with a fair share of Moderate Republicans along with a few Independents who hate Trumps guts to swing the election the other way. To this point there's no viable 3rd party candidate, and I suspect voting "none of the above" will count as a vote for Trump. In case you forgot, Trump lost the popular vote, and the only reason he won is folks hated Hillary more. #Never Trump. FWIW, any Republican who isn't Donald.... 

There's a reason Trump went  after Biden- because he rightly surmised Joe as a far bigger threat to his reelection than either Sanders or Warren. The religious right has no use for Pete- not because he's gay, but he'll 100% push the outer limits of the LBGT crowd. 

Hoorta as far as I'm concerned Whitewater was nickel and dime. Oh there was probably some crooked shit going on with some sort of land deal among the movers and shakers in Arkansas and Bill probably had a few bucks in the the kitty. Who cares about Monica Lewinsky? That's one of the reasons you learn to play guitar make a lot of money play professional sports or run for public office.

Because you get more blowjobs than the guy that works at the hardware store.

WSS

[Vambo]

Tulsi Gabbard: 'Present' vote on impeachment 'an active protest' against 2-party gridlock

 

[Vambo]

23 hours ago, Tour2ma said:

See y'all at the trial...

The back-and-forth rhetoric comes as Noah Feldman, the Harvard Law School professor who testified for Democrats at the impeachment inquiry earlier this month, wrote an explosive op-ed asserting that if Democrats do not forward the impeachment articles to the Senate as dictated by the Constitution, then Trump was never even impeached at all. The Constitution dictates that after impeachment by a majority in the House, a two-thirds vote is needed in the Senate to remove a president from office.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/mcconnell-impasse-trump-impeachment-trial-dems-cold-feet

[calfoxwc]

5 hours ago, hoorta said:

LOL Cal the Republicans claimed  the same obstruction crap on Clinton, and now say it's perfectly OK for Trump to pull the same garbage.

God, you guys have your heads so far up Trump's ass it's unbelievable....   

that makes you happy to claim, but it is not true. Clinton openly lied on national tv, and the stained dress of Monica Lewinsky was a match. That makes for hard core evidence that warranted serious LEGIT consideration of prosecution.

  You all have ZERO reason to prosecute. Your "dems" are trying to FIND some reason to justify their impeachment. Three freakin years of Muelller with a handpicked set of sixteen pro-Higgardly Trump Haters could NOT FIND ONE THING PRES TRUMP EVER DID WRONG.

Must suck to be you guys. LOL Sorry, but the point is, Clinton WAS guilty. It was bipartisan agreement. Nixon WAS guilty. Bipartisan agreement.

   Pres Trump and bout half of America are only guilty of electing OUR PRESIDENT.

No crime, no obstruction. The president is required by law to check about corruption before giving foreign aid to countries.

The executive branch is an EQUAL BRANCH OF OUR GOVERNMENT. Therefore, it cannot be subservient to demands on the political whims of your corrupt democratic party.

   Without any real direct evidence, there is NO CRIME. Therefore, there is NO OBSTRUCTION.

Why do I say that?

" https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34304.pdf

Summary
Obstruction of justice is the impediment of governmental activities. There are a host of federal
criminal laws that prohibit obstructions of justice. The six most general outlaw obstruction of
judicial proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1503), witness tampering (18 U.S.C. 1512), witness retaliation
(18 U.S.C. 1513), obstruction of congressional or administrative proceedings (18 U.S.C. 1505),
conspiracy to defraud the United States (18 U.S.C. 371), and contempt (a creature of statute, rule
and common law). All but Section 1503 cover congressional activities.
The laws that supplement, and sometimes mirror, the basic six tend to proscribe a particular
means of obstruction. Some, like the perjury and false statement statutes, condemn obstruction by
lies and deception. Others, like the bribery, mail fraud, and wire fraud statutes, prohibit
obstruction by corruption. Some outlaw the use of violence as a means of obstruction. Still others
ban the destruction of evidence. A few simply punish “tipping off” those who are the targets of an
investigation. A good number of these apply in a congressional context.
Many of these offenses may also provide the basis for racketeering and money laundering
prosecutions, and each provides the basis for criminal prosecution of anyone who aids and abets
in or conspires for their commission.
Moreover, regardless of the offense for which an individual is convicted, his sentence may be
enhanced as a consequence of any obstruction of justice for which he is responsible, if committed
during the course of the investigation, prosecution, or sentencing for the offense of his conviction.
The enhancement may result in an increase in his term of imprisonment by as much as four years.
This report is available in abbreviated form—without footnotes, quotations, or citations—as CRS
Report RS22784, Obstruction of Congress: An Abridged Overview of Federal Criminal Laws
Relating to Interference with Congressional Activities. Both versions have been excerpted from
CRS Report RL34303, Obstruction of Justice: an Overview of Some of the Federal Statutes that
Prohibit Interference with Judicial, Executive, or Legislative Activities. Other excerpted portions
are also available as the following: CRS Report RS22783, Obstruction of Justice: An Abridged
Overview of Related Federal Criminal Laws; CRS Report 98-808, Perjury Under Federal Law: A
Brief Overview; and CRS Report 98-807, Perjury Under Federal Law: A Sketch of the Elements,
all by Charles Doyle."

*********************************************

We got facts. You all have emotions.

We win. and Pres Trump is headed for a landslide victory in 2020 I believe. Not sure about the house. Too many emotional globalists who want a free ride out there in the huge cities.

   Come ON, man. fess up. The whole thing is a complete farce.

 

[calfoxwc]

7 hours ago, hoorta said:

And some  people just can't  handle  the  guy responsible  is a slimeball. Germany was going  gangbusters  pre WW II run by that little  guy with a mustache. To me the parallels between his followers and the hard core MAGAs are sort of  scary.

you apparently miss the part about our freedoms. Constitution/Bill of Rights. Under hitler's regime, there WERE NO RIGHTS. Only oppression  and profoundly hideous human rights violations, and horrific genocide.

Unless you are going to say that is what Pres Trump is doing, you should sing the "I'm So Sorry" song.

[calfoxwc]

I believe registering as an independent is pretty good a thing.But voting for someone who will never win, so far, is just a wasted vote.

It comes down to one choice or another for a better America. And obaMao did NOT make America better in any way.

and obaMao and corrupt company went so far as to break a lot of laws and FBI, Intel policies.

I understand that a lot of folks are not retired etc, but I've watched and listened to so much of the fake testimony by the dems. The complete partisan screwover the dems perpetrated in this entire fake, kangaroo court nonsense.

Even one of the four "experts" testified. He was a democrat who donated to Obamao twice, etc.

But he castigated the other three bigoted corrupt hacks and the process that was going on to effect a

pretend conviction.  It was a farce, this entire fiasco. You supporters should be terribly embarrassed - nasty nancy knows it - and knows it will be laughed out of the Senate. Not one direct knowledge witness sides with the dems' attempt to make believe land.

"head up asses" is just a slur to try to show up political opposition, and negate anything they say.

Not workin here now. It's a political, dangerous farce, this whole thing. And they will pay consequences in the coming elections.

Hopefully, they lose the House. That would be a great thing, because our country deserves better than the dirty circus being shopped around the past 3 years.

 

 

[Gorka]

19 hours ago, hoorta said:

Of course Cal. NO chance he's going to get kicked out of office, and Pelosi and the Democrats know that damn well. By my stupid math around 14 Republican senators would have to join the Democrats and vote for removal from office. Since it's turning into a strictly partisan thing- no way in hell that's happening. 

So the Donald will go on his merry way telling America and the world how wonderful he is, and those nasty mean Democrats don't like him. The real referendum comes in November. 

Please make that YOUR PRESIDENT TRUMP. I long ago tired of his grade school level tweets. 

 

And I suppose his tweets are deserving of an impeachment right?

Go back to football because you're clueless.  Seventeen seconds after he was elected those honorable democrats  you hold dear VOWED to impeach this president. He had not even put his hand on the bible yet. Yes they are nasty. Pelosi even admitted trying to get Trump impeached for 2 1/2 years....way before that phone call to Zelisky. You fucks counted on Mueller. You fucks counted on Mueller on the second go around by forcing him to testify, that didn't work either. "Obstruction of justice" no evidence of that either...these demonrats  tried impeaching him for everything imaginable, even being critical of "The Squad".

There was no basis for impeachment . NONE.

As you pointed out it was strictly partisan. The first time ever that an impeachment was strictly partisan. Leave it up to the demonrats to cheapen impeachment.

Are you aware of the 17 incidents of wrongdoing in the IG report committed by unelected bureaucrats who took it upon themselves to be the guardians of  the people and "save us" from Trump?

The DNC colluding with Russia by obtaining a fake dossier thru GPS and Christopher Steele in order to undermine an election?

Bidens admitting on video he bribed Ukraine by threatening to hold aid if the attorney investigating his son was not fired?

You people did exactly what you accuse Trump of doing.

Are you aware of what happened on the House floor? Pelosi instructed everyone to wear black to look like they were in mourning...to deceive the public by pretending to be saddened about what "they had to do"...and the look on her face when they cheered after Pelosi announced that impeachment had passed. She didn't want cheers. These filthy scum showed their true colors. Educate yourself.

Oh, and Trump is your president.

[Westside Steve]

1 hour ago, Gorka said:

 

And I suppose his tweets are deserving of an impeachment right?

Go back to football because you're clueless.  Seventeen seconds after he was elected those honorable democrats  you hold dear VOWED to impeach this president. He had not even put his hand on the bible yet. Yes they are nasty. Pelosi even admitted trying to get Trump impeached for 2 1/2 years....way before that phone call to Zelisky. You fucks counted on Mueller. You fucks counted on Mueller on the second go around by forcing him to testify, that didn't work either. "Obstruction of justice" no evidence of that either...these demonrats  tried impeaching him for everything imaginable, even being critical of "The Squad".

There was no basis for impeachment . NONE.

As you pointed out it was strictly partisan. The first time ever that an impeachment was strictly partisan. Leave it up to the demonrats to cheapen impeachment.

Are you aware of the 17 incidents of wrongdoing in the IG report committed by unelected bureaucrats who took it upon themselves to be the guardians of  the people and "save us" from Trump?

The DNC colluding with Russia by obtaining a fake dossier thru GPS and Christopher Steele in order to undermine an election?

Bidens admitting on video he bribed Ukraine by threatening to hold aid if the attorney investigating his son was not fired?

You people did exactly what you accuse Trump of doing.

Are you aware of what happened on the House floor? Pelosi instructed everyone to wear black to look like they were in mourning...to deceive the public by pretending to be saddened about what "they had to do"...and the look on her face when they cheered after Pelosi announced that impeachment had passed. She didn't want cheers. These filthy scum showed their true colors. Educate yourself.

Oh, and Trump is your president.

Oh we know. We all know. Just some of us don't care. Actually most of us don't care one way or the other.

WSS

[MLD Woody]

No, you need MORE CAPS. Haven't you seen your hero's tirades on Twitter?

[hoorta]

3 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Hoorta as far as I'm concerned Whitewater was nickel and dime. Oh there was probably some crooked shit going on with some sort of land deal among the movers and shakers in Arkansas and Bill probably had a few bucks in the the kitty. Who cares about Monica Lewinsky? That's one of the reasons you learn to play guitar make a lot of money play professional sports or run for public office.

Because you get more blowjobs than the guy that works at the hardware store.

WSS

 

3 hours ago, calfoxwc said:

that makes you happy to claim, but it is not true. Clinton openly lied on national tv, and the stained dress of Monica Lewinsky was a match. That makes for hard core evidence that warranted serious LEGIT consideration of prosecution.

 

And Trump cheats on his wife with a porn star, and then pays hush money to try and cover it up. Fine upstanding gentleman....  Your problem Cal- is you and others on this board think Trump can do no wrong.

2 hours ago, Gorka said:

And I suppose his tweets are deserving of an impeachment right?

No, but they're stupid as hell self aggrandizing crap. Please go back to MCing  the Apprentice ASAP Donald. 

[MLD Woody]

4 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

I would vote for mayor Pete over AOC or Elizabeth Warren in a heartbeat.

But I know it excites you to pretend it's a big deal.

WSS

I'm not the one making a big deal out of it...

 

Though I think it's time for another thread on here about there being too many black pageant winners or going after a 16 year old climate activist.... You know, the real hard hitting stuff

Or maybe we can call Trump's own nomination "the swamp" because he didn't blindly follow orders, completely losing all meaning of what the swamp actually is

[hoorta]

8 hours ago, Westside Steve said:

Don't be coy. In this case you know damn well I mean the people on your side who can't stand Trump.

So you pick an independent that you're throwing your weight behind and take it from there. I'm going to guess that he won't be to the right of the Republican party, just a hunch.

Right or wrong?

WSS

Well Steve- would it be accurate and fair to say Trump is as far right as Warren is to the left?  The problem I have is those Moderates (count me as one) who have soured on Trump's antics and happen to have a few communicating neurons to make up their\our own minds- and look at things objectively. We're apparently not welcome in the MAGA dominated current rendition of the Republican Party. Some of us aren't quite so blind to the the Cult of Personality gone haywire. FWIW, I'd vote Mike Pence in a heartbeat- Donald? Not so sure about that one. The economy is great? Great- that won't stop me from my current opinion Trump is a pompous  jackass. 

7 hours ago, MLD Woody said:

As you said that's always been a constant for certain people on this board. It's easier to just assume anyone that disagrees with you on one thing must be "the enemy" and disagree with you on everything. Easier to put them in a box. If you always vote straight ticket and refuse to even think otherwise, you'd assume others are the same. 

Ah Woodster- I may disagree with you on a lot of things political. But for sure, just about anyone who dares post on this sub forum who doesn't think Trump is the most wonderful president since Abraham Lincoln is a nasty mean uneducated doofus who only gets their political news from CNN.  

I'll probably check out for awhile and let them continue with their Trump circle jerk. 

[jbluhm86]

1 hour ago, hoorta said:

... But for sure, just about anyone who dares post on this sub forum who doesn't think Trump is the most wonderful president since Abraham Lincoln is a nasty mean uneducated doofus who only gets their political news from CNN.  

I'll probably check out for awhile and let them continue with their Trump circle jerk. 

You're just now realizing this? I came to the conclusion a while back that this pol board isn't so much a board for political discussion as it is a curated zoo for Cal and other nutjobs to keep them from railroading discussions on the Browns portion of the board with their political craziness. We're keeping the dinosaurs here in Jurassic Park so that they don't go rampaging on the Browns Board mainland.

[jbluhm86]

[jbluhm86]

14 hours ago, hoorta said:

LOL Cal the Republicans claimed  the same obstruction crap on Clinton, and now say it's perfectly OK for Trump to pull the same garbage.

God, you guys have your heads so far up Trump's ass it's unbelievable.... 

I neither supported Trump, nor did I claim that I like the guy. But, Cal is right on this one.

The charge of "Obstruction of Congress" is foolish, because Trump is challenging Congress' subpoenas in the courts. He has the right to do so; every American has the right to challenge any subpoena in court. While Trump's case is being figured out in the courts, he has the right of Executive privilege to order his staff not to testify before Congress. Clinton did the same thing when Congress subpoenaed him during his impeachment inquiry; once the courts rejected his claim, then he turned over information to Congress. Now, if the same situation happens to Trump and he still refuses to cooperate with Congress after the courts rule against him, THEN Congress would have a legitimate argument for obstruction/contempt of Congress. And the argument that many Democrats have been taking that "well, if Trump is innocent, then he should cooperate with Congress to prove his innocence" is absurd as well; our country was founded upon the doctrine of "innocent until proven guilty". No citizen is required or expected to produce evidence or cooperate with those accusing them of a crime to demonstrate their innocence; the burden of proof rests solely on the accusers to demonstrate guilt.

As for the Abuse of Power charge,  the Democrats in the House, in my opinion, failed to demonstrate this charge as well. The Democrat's "evidence" has been nothing but hearsay; none of the witnesses brought forth claimed - under oath -  that they DIRECTLY heard Trump mention a quid pro quo, their testimony has been 2nd and 3rd hand accounts that would be thrown out of any court in the US. If your best and strongest evidence is hearsay and whispers, with no tangible evidence, then your case is extremely weak.

Hoorta, i'm 33 years old; turning 34 next July. Since voting for John Kerry in my first Election Day when I was 18, back in 2004, I have voted Democrat almost exclusively. I voted for Obama twice. I've pretty much voted Democrat in every major and minor office. Having said all of that, I can say clear-eyed and open minded that this impeachment has been nothing but a political sham from the Democrats, from the start. Whether it's opening an impeachment inquiry on the most nebulous of "evidence", the refusal by Adam Schiff to allow the "whistleblower" to be cross-examined by Republicans as he promised, etc. From where i'm sitting, it is the Democrats who have abused their power since the very beginning.