Impeachment Megathread Part 3

[Arizona Iced Tea]

I have a feeling McConnell is going to have to allow witnesses because his party really wants Hunter Biden at the trial.

[emailking]

Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a BIG, BIG collossal Unforced Error with his "Head on a Pike Thing" Remarks.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrat-schiffs-head-pike-comment-draws-outrage-gop/story?id=68527054&cid=social_twitter_abcnp

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Key Swing GOP Vote said quote:"This is where he lost me".

Without Murkowskis Vote it's Game Over to call witnesses by Democrats.

She also said he was a good orator aside from that part.

[2016]

I have a feeling McConnell is going to have to allow witnesses because his party really wants Hunter Biden at the trial.

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

By the way, if we do have witnesses & testimonies that would entirely be done in a Senate Closed Door Session meaning the Public wouldn't see anything from it.

I'll give you an example: Senator Rob Portman of Ohio (who did not vote for Trump in 2016 and wrote in Stanley McChrystal I believe) said to CNN on Thursday Morning Quote "I don't like some things the President did but I am not going to throw him out of Office".

Bottom Line:
Atlas Democrats and Senate & House Democrats are the most NAIVE People I've ever seen. They really live in a totally different World & Universe if they think that they can get some evidence from John Bolton & Mick Mulvaney to make their case even stronger to remove Trump from Office.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a BIG, BIG collossal Unforced Error with his "Head on a Pike Thing" Remarks.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrat-schiffs-head-pike-comment-draws-outrage-gop/story?id=68527054&cid=social_twitter_abcnp

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Key Swing GOP Vote said quote:"This is where he lost me".

Without Murkowskis Vote it's Game Over to call witnesses by Democrats.

Suppose it is true that Murkowski decided to change her vote based just on Schiff saying "head on a pike."

Whether or not Schiff said "head on a pike" is entirely immaterial to the facts of the case and to the law.

So if Murkowski (or anyone else) would have changed their votes based on that, that simply means that they were not deciding how to vote based on the facts of the case and on the law.

This means that Murkowski (and any other such Senator) is violating their oaths by their own admission and is operating in bad faith - it means that she has no interest in upholding her duty under the Constitution.

[emailking]

Atlas Democrats and Senate & House Democrats are the most NAIVE People I've ever seen.

Really? In your entire life you've never met a person who was more naive than any of the Senate and House Democrats?

[Progressive Pessimist]

Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a BIG, BIG collossal Unforced Error with his "Head on a Pike Thing" Remarks.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrat-schiffs-head-pike-comment-draws-outrage-gop/story?id=68527054&cid=social_twitter_abcnp

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Key Swing GOP Vote said quote:"This is where he lost me".

Without Murkowskis Vote it's Game Over to call witnesses by Democrats.

Suppose it is true that Murkowski decided to change her vote based just on Schiff saying "head on a pike."

Whether or not Schiff said "head on a pike" is entirely immaterial to the facts of the case and to the law.

So if Murkowski (or anyone else) would have changed their votes based on that, that simply means that they were not deciding how to vote based on the facts of the case and on the law.

This means that Murkowski (and any other such Senator) is violating their oaths by their own admission and is operating in bad faith - it means that she has no interest in upholding her duty under the Constitution.

You're totally right, but this doesn't matter to Republicans. All they are doing is looking for excuses to acquit Trump. That's basically what the defense's arguments boil down to after all: "here are a bunch of bulls*** excuses, pick whichever poison you need to in order to rationalize acquitting Trump."

[emailking]

Suppose it is true that Murkowski decided to change her vote based just on Schiff saying "head on a pike."

Whether or not Schiff said "head on a pike" is entirely immaterial to the facts of the case and to the law.

So if Murkowski (or anyone else) would have changed their votes based on that, that simply means that they were not deciding how to vote based on the facts of the case and on the law.

This means that Murkowski (and any other such Senator) is violating their oaths by their own admission and is operating in bad faith - it means that she has no interest in upholding her duty under the Constitution.

I do feel like he's somewhat mischaracterizing her comment. She wasn't saying that's when she decided to change her mind on impeachment. I believe she was saying that was the part of his presentation she didn't liked.

[Absentee Voting Ghost of Ruin]

I have nothing really to add to the discussion other than to say it truly astounds me to see people still supporting Trump after all of the revelations.

Not just his attempt to bribe a foreign country to help him cheat in an election...but ALL of the things he's done.

These are decent people who have been brainwashed somehow to believe Trump is a good person and/or a good president; they've been brainwashed into believing that the end justifies the means, which it certainly does not if the means involve supporting modern day fascism.  I have never been so sad, bewildered, and ashamed for and of my fellow countrymen.  To support Trump is disgusting.  I don't care what your personal politics are, supporting Trump goes beyond that.  The man is evil and what he represents is evil.

Trump supporters are in the same bed with the KKK, Nazis, and other worsts of the worsts in our society.

Here's the thing that no one wants to face up to: they are not decent people. They chose to stop being "decent people" when they supported Trump, if not long before. Living in a nation where 20% or more of the population are the contemporaneous equivalent of Nazis is miserable, and I sympathize with anyone reluctant to come to terms with it. I don't have any good solutions to the situation we face with the Banana Republicans. But deluding ourselves about what they are, or how many of them there are isn't going to help.

Perhaps once the GOP are defeated democratically (if we can accomplish that without a war), and the inevitable Republican terrorism that follows has been dealt with, then maybe they'll go back to pretending they're decent people in public, and we can all get on with our lives in a decade, or two or three.

[Former Dean Phillips Supporters for Haley (I guess???!?) 👁️]

Adam Schiff (D-CA) made a BIG, BIG collossal Unforced Error with his "Head on a Pike Thing" Remarks.
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/democrat-schiffs-head-pike-comment-draws-outrage-gop/story?id=68527054&cid=social_twitter_abcnp

Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski, a Key Swing GOP Vote said quote:"This is where he lost me".

Without Murkowskis Vote it's Game Over to call witnesses by Democrats.

Suppose it is true that Murkowski decided to change her vote based just on Schiff saying "head on a pike."

Whether or not Schiff said "head on a pike" is entirely immaterial to the facts of the case and to the law.

So if Murkowski (or anyone else) would have changed their votes based on that, that simply means that they were not deciding how to vote based on the facts of the case and on the law.

This means that Murkowski (and any other such Senator) is violating their oaths by their own admission and is operating in bad faith - it means that she has no interest in upholding her duty under the Constitution.

You're totally right, but this doesn't matter to Republicans. All they are doing is looking for excuses to acquit Trump. That's basically what the defense's arguments boil down to after all: "here are a bunch of bulls*** excuses, pick whichever poison you need to in order to rationalize acquitting Trump."

Yeah, so if that is the case, what Schiff said is totally irrelevant. In that case, she was just looking for an excuse. If Schiff had not said that, then she would simply invent some other excuse.

Alternatively:

I do feel like he's somewhat mischaracterizing her comment. She wasn't saying that's when she decided to change her mind on impeachment. I believe she was saying that was the part of his presentation she didn't liked.

In that case, then fine. But if so, then Schiff's comment is also irrelevant - then it is simply something that she didn't like, but is not something that substantively altered whatever decision she will make on how to vote.

Either way, Schiff's comment is irrelevant. It is just something that Trump's defense team and Republicans more generally like to talk about as a distraction because they can't talk about anything else - namely the facts and the law.

Anything to distract from the facts about what Trump actually did.

[pbrower2a]

I have a feeling McConnell is going to have to allow witnesses because his party really wants Hunter Biden at the trial.

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

By the way, if we do have witnesses & testimonies that would entirely be done in a Senate Closed Door Session meaning the Public wouldn't see anything from it.

I'll give you an example: Senator Rob Portman of Ohio (who did not vote for Trump in 2016 and wrote in Stanley McChrystal I believe) said to CNN on Thursday Morning Quote "I don't like some things the President did but I am not going to throw him out of Office".

Bottom Line:
Atlas Democrats and Senate & House Democrats are the most NAIVE People I've ever seen. They really live in a totally different World & Universe if they think that they can get some evidence from John Bolton & Mick Mulvaney to make their case even stronger to remove Trump from Office.

Not denying that John Bolton is a piece of work... his first loyalty is to himself, and he is not going to do anything that would bring about criminal charges upon him. He may be a warmonger, but he has no desire to go before the Hague Tribunal as a war criminal.

Good reason exists for Republicans not wanting him to testify.     

[7,052,770]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

[2016]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

[7,052,770]

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

Dershowitz said Trump was in the wrong but not quite impeachment level? I haven't seen that, but if he really did, he's basically alone in that argument. I haven't seen anyone in the House or Senate say that, it's all just spitting venom at Democrats without addressing any of the allegations and certainly no agreement that Trump was even a little bit in the wrong.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Yeah I know, but the way you worded it implied that you think Bolton is going to stay silent and keep the damaging info to himself, not that there is nothing damaging he can say.

I agree with that argument - Bolton knows that Trump is guilty of impeachable offenses, but I doubt that he will spill the beans, and I doubt 20 Republicans will vote to convict he even he does. Both of those statements reflect very poorly on Bolton and Republicans.

[2016]

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

Dershowitz said Trump was in the wrong but not quite impeachment level? I haven't seen that, but if he really did, he's basically alone in that argument. I haven't seen anyone in the House or Senate say that, it's all just spitting venom at Democrats without addressing any of the allegations and certainly no agreement that Trump was even a little bit in the wrong.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Yeah I know, but the way you worded it implied that you think Bolton is going to stay silent and keep the damaging info to himself, not that there is nothing damaging he can say.

I agree with that argument - Bolton knows that Trump is guilty of impeachable offenses, but I doubt that he will spill the beans, and I doubt 20 Republicans will vote to convict he even he does. Both of those statements reflect very poorly on Bolton and Republicans.

A Bolton Testimony also be entirely behind closed Doors. That's what I am hearing over and over again if that happens but witnesses at this Point becoming less and less likely. Democrats would need to win all 4 Republican Votes (Collins, Romney, Murkowski and Alexander). It comes down to these four people. Right now my Prediction is that the Motion to call witnesses gets defeated 51-49.

[7,052,770]

Again, you're talking around the point. You seem to agree that Bolton has damaging testimony for Trump, but you're only focusing on (and celebrating) that Republicans aren't going to be removing him, even if they hear it.

I think we all know that Republican senators will probably acquit Trump no matter what, despite never producing a shred of exculpatory evidence or even attempting an "OK, he was wrong, but not wrong enough"-style argument.

[Nyvin]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Asking again - What exactly IS the Republican's/Trump's legal strategy for the claims...not including vilifying Democrats everywhere and anywhere? 

Specifically the issues of what Trump did with the aid money and Ukrainian officials,  how are they framing that what they did was okay and it's okay for future presidents to do?

If the argument Dershowitz is saying it's not impeachable he must be saying it's okay for future presidents to do the same thing, isn't he?

[2016]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Asking again - What exactly IS the Republican's/Trump's legal strategy for the claims...not including vilifying Democrats everywhere and anywhere? 

Specifically the issues of what Trump did with the aid money and Ukrainian officials,  how are they framing that what they did was okay and it's okay for future presidents to do?

If the argument Dershowitz is saying it's not impeachable he must be saying it's okay for future presidents to do the same thing, isn't he?

No, that's isn't what he is saying. Wait until Monday then you will hear it.
You Democrats acting like Dershowitz & Starr are some fraud Amateurs. Disgraceful!
I'm getting tired of your Democratic Views and Talking Points!

[7,052,770]

Starr literally said that Trump is guilty and Republicans should pressure him to resign, just a few weeks ago. But who cares, Big Brother Trump will deny it and his cult will forget it.

[Hindsight was 2020]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Asking again - What exactly IS the Republican's/Trump's legal strategy for the claims...not including vilifying Democrats everywhere and anywhere? 

Specifically the issues of what Trump did with the aid money and Ukrainian officials,  how are they framing that what they did was okay and it's okay for future presidents to do?

If the argument Dershowitz is saying it's not impeachable he must be saying it's okay for future presidents to do the same thing, isn't he?

No, that's isn't what he is saying. Wait until Monday then you will hear it.
You Democrats acting like Dershowitz & Starr are some fraud Amateurs. Disgraceful!
I'm getting tired of your Democratic Views and Talking Points!

Trust me the feeling is more than mutual for most of us here

[emailking]

Starr literally said that Trump is guilty and Republicans should pressure him to resign, just a few weeks ago. But who cares, Big Brother Trump will deny it and his cult will forget it.

I don't recall that. On the morning Sondland was going to testify (November), after his prepared testimony was released, Starr said that Republicans might have to consider pressuring Trump to resign. But after Sondland had testified and answered questions, and affirmed Trump never explicitly outlined a quid pro quo to him directly, Starr basically walked this back.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Asking again - What exactly IS the Republican's/Trump's legal strategy for the claims...not including vilifying Democrats everywhere and anywhere? 

Specifically the issues of what Trump did with the aid money and Ukrainian officials,  how are they framing that what they did was okay and it's okay for future presidents to do?

If the argument Dershowitz is saying it's not impeachable he must be saying it's okay for future presidents to do the same thing, isn't he?

No, that's isn't what he is saying. Wait until Monday then you will hear it.
You Democrats acting like Dershowitz & Starr are some fraud Amateurs. Disgraceful!
I'm getting tired of your Democratic Views and Talking Points!

Trust me the feeling is more than mutual for most of us here

That snark is a defense mechanism for the fact that he's supporting an impeachment that's not based on a single act of criminality.

Trump is going to be reelected, and the angst from the TDS sufferers around here will likely crash the site, lol.  

[Hindsight was 2020]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Asking again - What exactly IS the Republican's/Trump's legal strategy for the claims...not including vilifying Democrats everywhere and anywhere? 

Specifically the issues of what Trump did with the aid money and Ukrainian officials,  how are they framing that what they did was okay and it's okay for future presidents to do?

If the argument Dershowitz is saying it's not impeachable he must be saying it's okay for future presidents to do the same thing, isn't he?

No, that's isn't what he is saying. Wait until Monday then you will hear it.
You Democrats acting like Dershowitz & Starr are some fraud Amateurs. Disgraceful!
I'm getting tired of your Democratic Views and Talking Points!

Trust me the feeling is more than mutual for most of us here

That snark is a defense mechanism for the fact that he's supporting an impeachment that's not based on a single act of criminality.

Trump is going to be reelected, and the angst from the TDS sufferers around here will likely crash the site, lol.  

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=(title:52%20section:30121%20edition:prelim)

[7,052,770]

Excellent video as usual from The Legal Eagle. Great non-partisan analysis from an actual expert.

[Bidenworth2020]

Even if McConnell does call witnesses what do these Senate Democrats & House Democrats expect? Bolton is a REPUBLICAN. Yes, he might not like a lot of things Trump did & said but to think Bolton would literally stab his former boss in the back so that he could be removed from Office is really far-fetched. In what Universe do these Congressional Democrats (House & Senate) live in?

Wait, you acknowledge that Bolton's testimony might implicate Trump enough that he would be removed from office, but you just don't care? Wild.

To recap here are the possible arguments:

• Trump committed one of the most blatant impeachable offenses in American presidential history, and must be removed from office, regardless of the political consequences for whichever party. (the Democratic argument)
• Trump made a terrible error of judgment, but it does not rise to impeachment level. (No one is really making this argument.)
• Trump really is innocent, and there is evidence to back up this assertion. (No one is even attempting this argument.)
• DEMOCRATS ARE EVIL AND HATE AMERICA AND YOU!! FOR EVEN TRYING THIS!!!!1 (the Republican "argument")
• Trump is guilty, but who cares? I'm more concerned with beating the Democrats on the vote! (The "2016" argument?)

As I've posted many times, if Republicans could somehow argue #3, or even default to #2, I'd respect them so much more? Instead, they're just being disgraceful.

C'mon! Give me a Break. Alan Dershowitz was on CNN a short while ago and said the Articles Dems put forward ain't "Impeachable". That's basically Point 2 you put forward here and I bet Kenneth Starr will do a similar thing making Senate Republicans more comfortable.

And no, I am argueing that Bolton if called wouldn't say anything that hurts Trump.

Asking again - What exactly IS the Republican's/Trump's legal strategy for the claims...not including vilifying Democrats everywhere and anywhere? 

Specifically the issues of what Trump did with the aid money and Ukrainian officials,  how are they framing that what they did was okay and it's okay for future presidents to do?

If the argument Dershowitz is saying it's not impeachable he must be saying it's okay for future presidents to do the same thing, isn't he?

No, that's isn't what he is saying. Wait until Monday then you will hear it.
You Democrats acting like Dershowitz & Starr are some fraud Amateurs. Disgraceful!
I'm getting tired of your Democratic Views and Talking Points!

Trust me the feeling is more than mutual for most of us here

That snark is a defense mechanism for the fact that he's supporting an impeachment that's not based on a single act of criminality.

Trump is going to be reelected, and the angst from the TDS sufferers around here will likely crash the site, lol. 

Trump has, quite literally, asked a foreign power for dirt on a political opponent. It does not really get more clear cut than this. Saying his impeachment, based on this, is not "based on a single act of criminality", is utterly delusional, far more so than any supposed TDS (if Trump does not drive you crazy, how can you be sane?)

[Vaccinated Russian Bear]

https://twitter.com/EliStokols/status/1220870223328432128

https://twitter.com/Yamiche/status/1221112231359852544