What Trump's "defense" will be is starting to become clear...

From today's hearings, we got a glimpse. Here are the points with which they will try to convince the American People. They would go something like this:

1- "The judicial hasn't weighed in": Have they ever read the Constitution where it states which branch of government has the sole power of Impeachment? If they want to change the Constitution, propose an amendment!

2- "There is no crime... even if a crime is not required, it should be required": That's a great proposal for a Constitutional amendment. But, short of that, the argument is ridiculous.

3- "They impeach because they hate Trump": Americans do tend to hate Presidents who commit crimes to benefit themselves. But a constitutional amendment would be required to exonerate odious presidents of Impeachment.

4- "They are doing this too fast"... "They haven't heard from all the witnesses": Another Constitutional amendment proposal. In this case, of course it's fast, because we don't even need to investigate that much. Trump has committed some of his acts in in public. Even if there are a hundred corroborating witnesses only a handful are necessary to prove an act. And the witnesses that they wish we could hear are precisely those who Trump, in yet another act of abuse of power, has not allowed to testify.

5- "They wanted to impeach Trump since he took power": He's been abusing power since he took office. We did point out that abuse of power was impeachable. Bub because of the gravity of removing a President, impeachment requires more than just a handful of acts. Trump has exceeded the threshold by far.

6- "Democrats don't refer to the facts": That's a curious and hilarious argument that I heard today several times. Democrats have done nothing but refer to the facts. It's as if they were throwing everything in to see if anything stuck. This one sure won't. Especially because anybody can see that they don't refer to the facts, and Democrats do

7- "Asking for a favor is not impeachable"... "Calling a foreign leader is not impeachable"....: In general, the tactic is to mention the action but stop right at the point where the impeachable offense would come in. Trump is not being impeached for calling anybody or for just asking a favor. He's being impeached for calling a foreign leader and extorting him to make an announcement containing dirt on a political opponent and help him push a completely debunked conspiracy theory purely for personal political benefit.

8- "There is not enough evidence" There is more than enough evidence in the Mueller report to impeach Trump. If not that, there is more than enough evidence in the memo (that Trump calls "transcript") that the WH releases. If not that, there is more than enough evidence coming from corroborating witnesses, both first and second hand, some of which are his own appointees. But even if not that, ... there is more than enough evidence in the fact that he has stonewalled this investigation. That in of itself, is High Crime!

 

Problem being if there would happen to be some crime , you still have no evidence. So impeach away . Hello senate !

 

You should have listened more carefully to Turley. Every point you made is bogus.

 

There is bupkiss. All we found out today is that Mullah Nadler's experts are radicals who hate children and hoped to secure a Supreme Court appointment, thinking that it was already bought and paid for ---- until Hillary lost. Thank goodness.

 

Point 8. See how predictable they are?

 

Of course they are! That's what I'm saying on the OP.

 

"...experts who hate children" is such an idiotic argument, that I'm sure it's not going to be included in the defense of Trump. And it takes a lot to not be included, given that the ones that are likely to be there (listed above) are pretty dumb themselves.

 

This entire thread is nothing more than one gigantic strawman...

 

The hearing of the House Judiciary Committee today was illuminating. When it came to questioning by committee members the difference between the Democrats and the Republicans was startling.

The Democrats concentrated on the evidence and the impeachment charges while engaging the witnesses, four experts on our Constitution.

The Republicans largely provided their own testimony, and, while some dealt with the actual evidence and used the witnesses, roughly 90% of their questioning involved their own testimony. Some went back in history and alleged abuse of power by FDR, Johnson, JFK, Obama, and others. Others criticized and misrepresented the proceedings.

Those that dealt with the evidence, denied it existed or mischaracterized it. Some tried to legitimize the debunked story that Ukraine interfered in our election in 2016. Some argued Trump's obstruction was not really obstruction. Some denied Congressional oversight of the executive branch. Some argued that Trump's request of foreign interference in our Presidential election was okay, and that there was no bribery because Trump didn't say he was bribing Zelensky.

In other words, if Republicans on the Judiciary Committee could not adequately defend Trump, it is easy to see why his fans can't.

Of course, both have a problem. Trump is guilty as charged. That is why he is offering no defense and is relying on Trump Republicans in the Senate to get him off the hook.

 

Nevermind, if sandy says so it must be fact. Lol... oh boy..

 

After the July 25 phone call with Zelensky, as he usually does, Trump doubled on the Biden investigation. On Oct. 3, in a news conference on the White House lawn, he called on Ukraine and China to look into former Vice President Joe Biden and his son Hunter.

“If they were honest about it, they would start a major investigation into the Bidens,” Trump said when asked what he wanted Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to do about the former veep and his son.

“They should investigate the Bidens,” Trump said. “Likewise, China should start an investigation into the Bidens, because what happened in China is just about as bad as what happened with Ukraine.”

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/03/trump-calls-for-ukraine-china-to-investigate-the-bidens.html

Those who argue there is no evidence of Trump's abuse of power, seeking foreign interference in our Presidential election to his advantage, those who say the evidence is all hearsay are ignoring these statements and the statements he made in the July 25 call.

 

Now you're learning.

 

Why do you keep posting the same post in multiple threads?

http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?posts/1071223668/

 

Wow! You guys are starting to get it. Yes.... The arguments that Republicans will apparently use to try to defend this criminal President are nothing but one gigantic strawman.

Can you think of any other arguments, besides those listed, that might be used in Trump's defense? Those that you have just labeled as "strawman"

Of course you can't. That's my point!

 

Completely agree. To summarize, we saw Democrats referring to the issues, Republicans throwing strawman arguments around... and Jim Jordan, all on his own doing what he does best: screaming in his screechy voice at the witnesses.

 

Is this how you defend your hero? Pathetic.

 

1. The judiciary settles disputes between the WH and Congress. It’s already in the Constitution. Unlike previous impeachment’s the dem clown show now claims using the judiciary is grounds for impeachment.

2. Clearly the Constitution refers to high crimes and misdemeanors. The dem clown show has decided that anything they don’t like is impeachable.

3. Have to identify a crime to have a crime. The dem clown show has been hollering impeachment since day one for no other reason than butt hurt.

4. Meh, zero evidence of the dem clown show narrative is all they need.

5. A fact.

6. For one, a narrative isn’t fact and assumptions are not proof.

7. Sans any proof the claim is just a repetition of the dem clown show narrative.

8. LOL, the Mueller report was a total bust for the dems. Apparently you are not aware that assumptions are not fact.

 

You are not worth a response, run along and post the same thing in up to 6 different threads. Might want to start changing a sentence or two around. Your just mad I pointed out you are flooding the board and cross thread posting the exact same post. Anyone can view your recent postings and see it, and you have the unmitigated gall to call others "pathetic". Come back when you can manage an original post. Most people would be embarrassed to do such a thing, anyhow, I'm done wasting time with you. Go ahead and get the last word in.

 

Its committing political suicide to impeach a president during an election year, why let a bunch of insider trading millionaire congress men and women decide an election?

The silent majority comprehends this

 

LOL, what evidence? Assumptions by bureaucrats that think they are in charge of foreign policy?

 

Exactly the state of California with there instance to go rouge and honor the Parris accords going against the federal government...


Exactly, some Democrats almost committed treason by trying to stop Hillarys state department war against lybia.

 

LOL, watched every one so far. Have you?

So far the only direct evidence is exculpatory. All the rest is assumptions.

 

Abuse of power is stomping on corruption? Say it out loud and listen to yoursel , does that sound ridiculous? Sure it sounds ridiculous, because it is!

 

Trump could always plead for equal justice.

All four “witnesses” today (three Democratic, one Republican) agreed that the standard the Dems are using for impeachment would have led to slam dunk impeachments for Washington, Lincoln, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, and Obama.

 

Yea, im learnin. Maybe one day when your bored go read some of the doozies you tried to sell PF for the past few years. Wow, i mean way off sandy .