Hypothetically speaking, Trump supporters, what would need to happen for you to believe the...

[Pilate]

The Whistleblower, and Adam Schiff, under oath connected to a lie detector.

Your answer is cowardly and nonsensical.

Answer the real question:

What evidence, Specifically, would convince you that trump abused his power by withholding foreign security aid for personal gain?

The TRUTH.

AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT WITHOUT A LIE DETECTOR

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

'Personal gain' is pure speculation and is the basis for the entire Impeachment FARCE. President Trump wanted to get to the bottom of Obama/Biden Ukrainian corruption. What would he fear from bumbling Biden as a political opponent? ROFL

Cowardly, nonsensical answer. I am not claiming that is true.

You are being asked for examples of evidence that would convince you that trump withheld foreign security aid for personal gain.

So...examples?

 

[B. Kidd]

...investigation and impeachment proceedings are valid?

What evidence would need to exist short of Trump magically admitting wrong doing in full detail?

It seems as though you dismiss the investigation into Trump for two reasons and two reasons only and nothing will change your mind about it. Those reasons are:

1) Trump is a republican and you voted for him.

2) The democrats are behind the impeachment.

Is that it? What I find incredibly lame is that you don’t even think the investigation itself is necessary. You think the democrats or any investigative body should drop the whole thing. Based on all of the facts presented, you can’t even say “well, okay. Let’s look at a few things. There are a few red flags about this whole thing if I’m trying to be objective about it. Just let an independent body investigate it instead of those demo-rats!”

you might have a point if this impeachment thing didnt start on day one....

This and the fact that 13 of the 17 Democrats on the Judiciary Committee have already voted 'aye' on previous House Impeachment resolutions!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That is a good question

The grow a pair and answer it. If you do, you will be the first.

 

[Crepitus]

Too all of you tRumplings who said they needed evidence, there is lots of evidence so obviously that is not what you need.

Try again?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In other words...the truth?

Nonsensical and cowardly.

Let's try again.

What are some examples of evidence that would convince you that trump withheld foreign security aid for personal political gain?

It's a straightforward question.

 

[airplanemechanic]

The Whistleblower, and Adam Schiff, under oath connected to a lie detector.

Your answer is cowardly and nonsensical.

Answer the real question:

What evidence, Specifically, would convince you that trump abused his power by withholding foreign security aid for personal gain?

The TRUTH.

AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT WITHOUT A LIE DETECTOR

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

Neither is hearsay evidence.

 

[Auld Phart]

The Whistleblower, and Adam Schiff, under oath connected to a lie detector.

Your answer is cowardly and nonsensical.

Answer the real question:

What evidence, Specifically, would convince you that trump abused his power by withholding foreign security aid for personal gain?

The TRUTH.

AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT WITHOUT A LIE DETECTOR

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

According to Nadler and Schiff, impeachment is not a 'court setting'.

 

[Oddball]

I would need to see evidence of real wrong doing like shipping $1.5 billion dollars in cash to a Terrorist State

Your answer is cowardly and nonsensical.

Answer the real question:

What evidence, Specifically, would convince you that trump abused his power by withholding foreign security aid for personal gain?

'Personal gain' is pure speculation and is the basis for the entire Impeachment FARCE. President Trump wanted to get to the bottom of Obama/Biden Ukrainian corruption. What would he fear from bumbling Biden as a political opponent? ROFL.

They're running with the "for personal gain" narrative, even though there isn't a single solitary shred of evidence to support it.

And they have the nerve to accuse others of being cultish.

 

[Pilate]

The Whistleblower, and Adam Schiff, under oath connected to a lie detector.

Your answer is cowardly and nonsensical.

Answer the real question:

What evidence, Specifically, would convince you that trump abused his power by withholding foreign security aid for personal gain?

The TRUTH.

AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT WITHOUT A LIE DETECTOR

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

According to Nadler and Schiff, impeachment is not a 'court setting'.

Well, shit, then let’s make it a real court setting and convict the president then, already. Apparently the evidence is all there. Written, recorded, apparently Trump even confessed. I’ll be very disappointed if this fails to materialize.

 

[toobfreak]

...investigation and impeachment proceedings are valid?

Simple Billy. Just as answered in another thread, how about SOME ACTUAL PROOF of the charges?

 

[Auld Phart]

The Whistleblower, and Adam Schiff, under oath connected to a lie detector.

Your answer is cowardly and nonsensical.

Answer the real question:

What evidence, Specifically, would convince you that trump abused his power by withholding foreign security aid for personal gain?

The TRUTH.

AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET IT WITHOUT A LIE DETECTOR

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

Lie detectors are not used in court settings.

According to Nadler and Schiff, impeachment is not a 'court setting'.

Well, shit, then let’s make it a real court setting and convict the president then, already. Apparently the evidence is all there. Written, recorded, apparently Trump even confessed. I’ll be very disappointed if this fails to materialize.

 

[MarathonMike]

'Personal gain' is pure speculation and is the basis for the entire Impeachment FARCE. President Trump wanted to get to the bottom of Obama/Biden Ukrainian corruption. What would he fear from bumbling Biden as a political opponent? ROFL

Cowardly, nonsensical answer. I am not claiming that is true.

You are being asked for examples of evidence that would convince you that trump withheld foreign security aid for personal gain.

So...examples?

See Joe Biden's boasting video about he threatened to withhold $1 Billion dollars of aid for his personal gain of protecting his son. That would be a good example.

 

[Desperado]

Nothing!! The Dems have blown any credibility that they might have had. It is all BS now, Can't wait for 2020 when Trump wins re-election and the Dems heads explode.

 

[Pilate]

Nothing!! The Dems have blown any credibility that they might have had. It is all BS now, Can't wait for 2020 when Trump wins re-election and the Dems heads explode.

Don’t get too excited. He’s only really the lesser of two evils.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

...investigation and impeachment proceedings are valid?

What evidence would need to exist short of Trump magically admitting wrong doing in full detail?

It seems as though you dismiss the investigation into Trump for two reasons and two reasons only and nothing will change your mind about it. Those reasons are:

1) Trump is a republican and you voted for him.

2) The democrats are behind the impeachment.

Is that it? What I find incredibly lame is that you don’t even think the investigation itself is necessary. You think the democrats or any investigative body should drop the whole thing. Based on all of the facts presented, you can’t even say “well, okay. Let’s look at a few things. There are a few red flags about this whole thing if I’m trying to be objective about it. Just let an independent body investigate it instead of those demo-rats!”

Well, democrats shot their own feet with their calls for impeachment day one with no evidence worthy of impeachment. No amount of evidence can get past that.
But if you really cared about real crimes you have 8 years of obama to see all the crimes you want to see.

 

[OKTexas]

...investigation and impeachment proceedings are valid?

What evidence would need to exist short of Trump magically admitting wrong doing in full detail?

It seems as though you dismiss the investigation into Trump for two reasons and two reasons only and nothing will change your mind about it. Those reasons are:

1) Trump is a republican and you voted for him.

2) The democrats are behind the impeachment.

Is that it? What I find incredibly lame is that you don’t even think the investigation itself is necessary. You think the democrats or any investigative body should drop the whole thing. Based on all of the facts presented, you can’t even say “well, okay. Let’s look at a few things. There are a few red flags about this whole thing if I’m trying to be objective about it. Just let an independent body investigate it instead of those demo-rats!”

We're not seeing an investigation, everything has been predetermined, from the day palousey announced the inquiry, without seeing any evidence. The later rigged inquiry vote, the speaker saying Trump was an impostor president and then demanding the judiciary committee draw up articles of impeachment, in the military we called that improper command influence.

But perhaps if the commies would abide by the house rules that require the intel and judiciary committees allow a minority hearing day and allow them to call the witnesses they want to hear from. That might lend a speck of legitimacy to the kangaroo court we're now witnessing.

.

 

[Meister]

When I'm asked "what kind of evidence" it's already been answered.

False. "Proof!" is not an answer. You are being asked to name specific examples of evidence that would constitute proof, in your eyes.

Now why is it that not ONE single trump cultist can grow the stones to answer this?

You asked and it was answered several times....it would have been nice if the dems had a smoking gun or some actual evidence to provide
that could be used in a court of law and not what's commonly used in a kangaroo court

 

[Billy000]

...investigation and impeachment proceedings are valid?

What evidence would need to exist short of Trump magically admitting wrong doing in full detail?

One single, solitary shred of proof would be a good starter and I'm not even a Trump supporter. I voted for Gary Johnson.

Uh okay but I asked for a specific hypothetical example and you can’t even tell me something so simple.

 

[airplanemechanic]

...investigation and impeachment proceedings are valid?

What evidence would need to exist short of Trump magically admitting wrong doing in full detail?

One single, solitary shred of proof would be a good starter and I'm not even a Trump supporter. I voted for Gary Johnson.

Uh okay but I asked for a specific hypothetical example and you can’t even tell me something so simple.

I don't do hypotheticals. Say he committed a crime? Provide proof of that crime. And that's it. Real proof. Proof admissible in a court of law. Whatever proof would depend on whatever crime he's accused of.