Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics."

Asking genuinely to Trump supporters: why do you think this? Can you think of another example where a president has asked a foreign power for help in an election?

The irony is that by refusing to punish his behavior, you are ensuring that from now on, we will in fact get the swamp that you think we already have.

It doesn't matter what they think. They are winning because they have the numbers. They are winning because the United States does not have an Attorney General.

The FEC Chair has plainly said that it's illegal. Repeatedly. But laws only matter if they are enforced.

Impeach Trump if you think he is violating the law and accept the decision by the Senate if they choose not to convict him. It is the way our system works.

You have another option whether you impeach him or not: convince the voters that Trump is someone who does not obey the law and therefore does not deserve to be reelected. If the voters still decide to reelect him, then accept that verdict and move on - again, the system worked even if you did not like the end result.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics."

Asking genuinely to Trump supporters: why do you think this? Can you think of another example where a president has asked a foreign power for help in an election?

The irony is that by refusing to punish his behavior, you are ensuring that from now on, we will in fact get the swamp that you think we already have.

It doesn't matter what they think. They are winning because they have the numbers. They are winning because the United States does not have an Attorney General.

The FEC Chair has plainly said that it's illegal. Repeatedly. But laws only matter if they are enforced.

Anonymous wrote:

Romney's influence in the party is zilch but he is the new favorite of Democrats sort of like McCain became after 2016. Of course, the Democrats did not have a kind word to say about either of them when they were running against Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney rallying Republican Senators to vote yes on a conviction.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/mitt-romney-wont-primary-trump-but-trying-to-bring-him-down-impeachment-2020

That's great, but we need 20. Not 4.

Hmm! Romney, Collins, Gardner and Sasse .......... and how many of them have voted against Trump on any key issues? They all talk the talk but they don't walk the walk!

Romney's influence in the party is zilch but he is the new favorite of Democrats sort of like McCain became after 2016. Of course, the Democrats did not have a kind word to say about either of them when they were running against Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics."

Asking genuinely to Trump supporters: why do you think this? Can you think of another example where a president has asked a foreign power for help in an election?

The irony is that by refusing to punish his behavior, you are ensuring that from now on, we will in fact get the swamp that you think we already have.

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics."

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney rallying Republican Senators to vote yes on a conviction.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/mitt-romney-wont-primary-trump-but-trying-to-bring-him-down-impeachment-2020

That's great, but we need 20. Not 4.

Hmm! Romney, Collins, Gardner and Sasse .......... and how many of them have voted against Trump on any key issues? They all talk the talk but they don't walk the walk!

Romney's influence in the party is zilch but he is the new favorite of Democrats sort of like McCain became after 2016. Of course, the Democrats did not have a kind word to say about either of them when they were running against Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney rallying Republican Senators to vote yes on a conviction.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/mitt-romney-wont-primary-trump-but-trying-to-bring-him-down-impeachment-2020

That's great, but we need 20. Not 4.

Hmm! Romney, Collins, Gardner and Sasse .......... and how many of them have voted against Trump on any key issues? They all talk the talk but they don't walk the walk!

Romney's influence in the party is zilch but he is the new favorite of Democrats sort of like McCain became after 2016. Of course, the Democrats did not have a kind word to say about either of them when they were running against Obama.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Romney rallying Republican Senators to vote yes on a conviction.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/mitt-romney-wont-primary-trump-but-trying-to-bring-him-down-impeachment-2020

That's great, but we need 20. Not 4.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Sen. Rob Portman said on Monday it was “not appropriate” for President Donald Trump to ask Ukraine and China to investigate former Vice President Joe Biden, joining a small group of Republicans to express concern over Trump's calls for foreign countries to become involved in U.S. elections.”

https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/07/rob-portman-trump-china-joe-biden-038222

From the same linked article:

The Ohio Republican told the Columbus Dispatch that while the president’s actions do not amount to “an impeachable offense” in his view, he believes Trump made a mistake in mixing his own domestic politics with foreign policy.

Let's count Portman as voting for his acquittal in the Senate if he is imeached!

He disputed Trump’s characterization of an ousted Ukrainian prosecutor as an aggressive battler of corruption, whom the president asserts was fired because he was digging into Biden and his son Hunter’s business dealings. Portman was part of a bipartisan group of senators who wrote a letter to the Ukraine president in 2016 seeking reforms in the prosecutor’s office; Monday, Portman said the senators believed the prosecutor wasn’t doing nearly enough to root out corruption — not that he was doing too much.

And the Biden issue never came up, Portman said: “That didn’t even enter into our calculus as far as I know, one way or the other. It certainly didn’t into mine. Because that was something that nobody was even talking about.”

The letter, also signed by Ohio Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown, came a couple of months after the vice president threatened to cut off a loan guarantee to Ukraine — a move Biden says was motivated by the concern of U.S. officials and others about Ukrainian corruption.

But Ohio Democratic Chair David Pepper was not reluctant to talk: “Rob Portman is finally speaking up after allowing Donald Trump’s smear against Joe Biden and his family to go on for weeks or longer. Last week reporters exposed a letter that Portman and his fellow senators signed back in 2016. Today Portman admits that the letter actually backed up Biden’s account ... The idea that he’s already made up his mind that Donald Trump’s conduct — shaking down foreign leaders to do his political bidding — does not rise to the level of impeachment is ludicrous.”

Portman said he first heard about Trump wanted a probe of the Bidens when it broke in the news a few weeks ago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics." The way to correct it is to field a better candidate and vote for that candidate.

The loser from all this is obviously Joe Biden. Does anyone seriously believe that Hunter didn't get his Ukrainian paychecks simply because of who his daddy was/is? That doesn't necessarily mean Biden broke the law. Hunter has been strangely quiet, remarkable, isn't it? Probably because his attorneys have told him to keep his mouth closed. One would think Hunter would be very visible and vocal on all news media explaining how he came to get a $50,000/month paycheck other than simply because his daddy was the V.P. But nope--no explanation. Hmmmm.

Is this all you've got? Lie and then change the subject? LOLLLLLLLLLLOLLLLLOOOOOLLLLL

Anonymous wrote:Romney rallying Republican Senators to vote yes on a conviction.

https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/10/mitt-romney-wont-primary-trump-but-trying-to-bring-him-down-impeachment-2020

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics." The way to correct it is to field a better candidate and vote for that candidate.

The loser from all this is obviously Joe Biden. Does anyone seriously believe that Hunter didn't get his Ukrainian paychecks simply because of who his daddy was/is? That doesn't necessarily mean Biden broke the law. Hunter has been strangely quiet, remarkable, isn't it? Probably because his attorneys have told him to keep his mouth closed. One would think Hunter would be very visible and vocal on all news media explaining how he came to get a $50,000/month paycheck other than simply because his daddy was the V.P. But nope--no explanation. Hmmmm.

Anonymous wrote:The bottom line is that it's neither illegal, nor an impeachable offense, for a politician--including the President--to use his or her position to seek political favors. It's standard operating procedure and all the swamp creatures in Washington do it, constantly. That's part of "politics." The way to correct it is to field a better candidate and vote for that candidate.

The loser from all this is obviously Joe Biden. Does anyone seriously believe that Hunter didn't get his Ukrainian paychecks simply because of who his daddy was/is? That doesn't necessarily mean Biden broke the law. Hunter has been strangely quiet, remarkable, isn't it? Probably because his attorneys have told him to keep his mouth closed. One would think Hunter would be very visible and vocal on all news media explaining how he came to get a $50,000/month paycheck other than simply because his daddy was the V.P. But nope--no explanation. Hmmmm.