To impeach or not to impeach, that is the question

[Sandy Shanks]

E.U. Ambassador Gordon Sondland is a political appointee, not a career foreign service advisor, having contributed one million dollars to the Trump campaign. Whenever he wants, he can dial up the President. That may change after today.

“I know that members of this Committee have frequently framed these complicated issues in the form of a simple question: Was there a ‘quid pro quo?’,” Sondland’s statement reads. “As I testified previously, with regard to the requested White House call and White House meeting, the answer is yes.”

Specifically, “a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for [Ukrainian] President [Volodymyr] Zelensky,” which Zelensky felt was essential to his country's survival against Russian aggression.

In addition, Sondland summarized Giuliani’s role in his testimony.

Mr. Giuliani’s requests were a quid pro quo for arranging a White House visit for President Zelensky. Mr. Giuliani demanded that Ukraine make a public statement announcing investigations of the 2016 election/DNC server and Burisma. Mr. Giuliani was expressing the desires of the President of the United States, and we knew that these investigations were important to the President.

Burisma is code for Biden. Hunter Biden was on the board of Burisma.

For Trump, Sondland's testimony was devastating. There is much more, far too much for this venue.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Fox News reports, "Former Whitewater Independent Counsel Ken Starr said that the testimony of Ambassador to the European Union Gordon Sondland all but guarantees articles of impeachment will be drawn up by House Democrats."

The Republicans are struggling to defend Trump. Basically, their defense is three-pronged.

They attack the Democrats, call the impeachment inquiry a sideshow, and attack the media for reporting the developments of the inquiry.

They say that President Zelensky never felt the pressure of extortion. American assistance and Trump's good graces are existential for Ukraine, and the very last thing Zelensky would do is impugn the American President's intentions. It would be suicidal, and that goes for his ministers as well.

They would ask if Trump ever told the witnesses directly that he was extorting the Ukrainian leader to get what he wanted. This last defense indicates they think that Trump is an idiot. The idea that Trump didn't tell Sondland that he was bribing Zelensky to get the investigations of the Bidens and the debunked Crowdstrike is no defense. Trump did tell Sondland, Volker, and Perry, "Talk to Rudy." Giuliani was working to get the investigations, and the "Three Amigos" did as they were told and worked with Giuliani who was in turn working for his client, Trump.

The other weakness of the third defense is that it exposes the obvious. Who did have personal knowledge of the Trump's wishes and the quid pro quo? Why, Mulvaney, Bolton, Pompeo, and Giuliani, of course. Who is preventing those four to testify? Why, Trump, of course.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Trump campaign sources say EU Ambassador Gordon Sondland's allegation of a quid pro quo implicating Trump and top administration officials "blindsided" aides inside the White House, the re-election campaign as well as some Republican lawmakers.

A separate Trump campaign adviser was furious with Sondland's testimony, calling it "aggravating." The adviser said it came as a complete surprise that the EU Ambassador would implicate senior members of the administration. "It was really bizarre," the adviser said, adding Sondland appeared to be throwing top administration officials under the bus in real time.

Another campaign source in touch with the White House team handling impeachment today said at the outset of the Sondland hearing, those aides seemed to be distressed – seemed to be “freaking out.” The source acknowledged Sondland’s testimony undermined the White House’s central argument that there was “no quid pro quo,” noting there are some Trump allies who have wanted to shift from that to arguing the appearance of quid pro quo was really just the President executing his legitimate foreign policy goals.

Then, of course, came the usual denial of reality.

A third campaign source said enough questions were raised about Sondland's testimony by GOP members to protect Trump from sustaining serious damage. "No direct hit," the Trump adviser said.

https://www.cnn.com/politics/live-n...g-11-20-19/h_3ab96a833fe6cad36af65a69daf9b320

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Today Trump refused to answer questions from reporters about the impeachment hearings, but he spoke for over 50 minutes on "Fox and Friends." In the interview he declared "I want a trial," referring to a Senate trial if the House passes Articles of Impeachment.
...
He then provided a list of witnesses in his Senate trial. The list included the whistleblower, Adam Schiff, Hunter Biden, and Joe Biden.

Conspicuous by their absence are witnesses close to Trump and close to the issues surrounding Ukraine and the July 25 phone call. Absent are Mick Mulvaney, director of the OMB, the agency that withheld the military aid to Ukraine. Also, SecState Mike Pompeo is missing, and he was the boss of many of the witnesses who appeared in the hearings. Absent also is John Bolton, the fired NSA and the person most knowledgeable of the events surrounding the July 25 phone call. Also missing is Rudy Giuliani, Trump's personal lawyer who played a key role in the Ukrainian controversy.

If Trump is innocent like he says he is, and the call was "perfect" then, hypothetically, these witnesses could tell their story and prove Trump was, indeed, innocent.

However, Trump does not want these people to appear at his Senate trial. Why? They have first hand knowledge of Trump's wants and desires ... and the motivation.

That's why.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Today Trump refused to answer questions from reporters about the impeachment hearings, but he spoke for over 50 minutes on "Fox and Friends." In the interview he declared "I want a trial," referring to a Senate trial if the House passes Articles of Impeachment.

Despite a preponderance of evidence of Trump's deceit and abuse of power, it would be a mistake for the House to impeach Trump.

The ultimate purpose of impeachment is to remove a person from office. Passing an Articles of Impeachment and a Senate trial is enormously divisive. The ultimate result of an impeachment is that it would tear our country apart.

The ultimate goal of Democrats, in one form or another, is to remove Trump from office. Many observers feel that would not be accomplished if the House passed Articles of Impeachment.

Why? One reason is the Democrats would be doing exactly what Trump wanted them to do, or so he says. He wants a Senate trial. He thinks it is his only chance to win reelection because everything he has done has turned sour. His forlorn accomplishments would include a failed Middle East policy, the lunacy of freeing up Iran to resume her nuclear research, his retreat in Syria which enhanced Russian interests in the pivotal Middle East, and his months long trade war with China which resulted in higher prices and a stagnant Wall Street from Jan. 2018 through Oct. 2019. The stock market only now is beginning to recover because analysts think Trump's trade war is coming to an end.

Another reason is, Americans are not behind impeachment. For impeachment to be successful, it would require an overwhelming support of Americans, somewhere in the area of 85 to 95%. Then Republicans in the Senate would listen.

Which brings us to the third reason why impeachment will fail. Many Republicans think what Trump did in Ukraine was inappropriate, but not a reason to remove him from office. Many disagree, thinking that a Presidential request for foreign interference in our Presidential election does warrant removal from office. They would ask Republicans, is foreign interference in our elections now acceptable? Apparently it is for Republicans because they are not breaking ranks. As things stand right now, not one Republican would vote to remove Trump from office.

So, what is the point of impeaching Trump? The best chance Democrats have of removing Trump from office is to continue to question his honesty and competence. Trump is an extremely unpopular President. They should feed on that, and maybe they will win next November.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Trump said Tuesday that he would “love” for several senior administration officials to testify in the impeachment inquiry, but he claimed the White House was preventing them from doing so to protect the institution of the Presidency. ::

Trump is becoming a really great comedian. I could not stop laughing when I read this.

Is someone else in charge of the White House?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Trump continues with his comedy routine.

Bloomberg reports, "Donald Trump denied directing Rudy Giuliani to go to Ukraine to look for dirt on his political rivals, in an interview with former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly."

“No, I didn’t direct him, but he is a warrior, he is a warrior,” Trump told O’Reilly.

"Asked by O’Reilly what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine, Trump said “you have to ask that to Rudy.'"

“Rudy has other clients, other than me,” Trump added. “He’s done a lot of work in Ukraine over the years.”

 

[Sandy Shanks]

This is from the transcript of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. It was provided by the White House. The following is a quote from Trump.

Good because I· heard you had a prosecutor who· was very·good and he was shut down and that's really unfair._·A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor bf New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General.· :Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States,· the woman., was bad news and the people she was dealing with in.the Ukraine.were bad news so I jtist want to_let you know that. The other thing, there's a lot of.talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.



Rudy Giuliani ✔ @RudyGiuliani


The investigation I conducted concerning 2016 Ukrainian collusion and corruption, was done solely as a defense attorney to defend my client against false charges, that kept changing as one after another were disproven.

12:43 PM - Nov 6, 2019

 

[Faun]

Trump continues with his comedy routine.

Bloomberg reports, "Donald Trump denied directing Rudy Giuliani to go to Ukraine to look for dirt on his political rivals, in an interview with former Fox News host Bill O’Reilly."

“No, I didn’t direct him, but he is a warrior, he is a warrior,” Trump told O’Reilly.

"Asked by O’Reilly what Giuliani was doing in Ukraine, Trump said “you have to ask that to Rudy.'"

“Rudy has other clients, other than me,” Trump added. “He’s done a lot of work in Ukraine over the years.”

That's great that Trump denied involvement. That means Giuliani can be compelled to testify and can't hide behind attorney/client privilege.

 

[g5000]

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

There was no chance Bill Clinton was going to be removed by 67 votes in the Senate, but the Republican House impeached him anyway.

And if lying about a blowjob is a high crime and misdemeanor, then extorting a foreign leader for personal domestic political gain is a many orders of magnitude greater high crime and misdemeanor.


The highest that support for impeaching Bill Clinton ever got was 29 percent.

The support for impeaching and REMOVING Donald Trump from office is 50 percent. Way higher than those who wanted Clinton impeached.

Way higher.

 

[lennypartiv]

You libs are wasting your time. Mitch McConnell has Trump's back in the Senate.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

This is from the transcript of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. It was provided by the White House. The following is a quote from Trump.

Good because I· heard you had a prosecutor who· was very·good and he was shut down and that's really unfair._·A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor bf New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General.· :Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States,· the woman., was bad news and the people she was dealing with in.the Ukraine.were bad news so I jtist want to_let you know that. The other thing, there's a lot of.talk about Biden's son,. that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you ·can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.



Rudy Giuliani ✔ @RudyGiuliani


The investigation I conducted concerning 2016 Ukrainian collusion and corruption, was done solely as a defense attorney to defend my client against false charges, that kept changing as one after another were disproven.

12:43 PM - Nov 6, 2019

USA Today reports, "House Republicans drafted a report to counter Democratic arguments for the impeachment of President Donald Trump for his dealings with Ukraine.

"Republicans wrote in a 123-page draft report that the evidence doesn’t support accusations of pressure or that Trump tried to cover up his conversation with Zelensky. Trump released a summary of the July 25 call on Sept. 25 and has argued that he was justified in encouraging an investigation because of widespread corruption in Ukraine."

The only problem with that is that in his April 21 phone call and his July 25 phone call, Trump never mentioned general corruption in Ukraine, only the possible, unexplained corruption of Hunter Biden, his main rival's son. AP FACT CHECK: Trump, GOP claims on Ukraine corruption

The GOP report largely claims there is no evidence of Trump's crimes. “The evidence presented does not prove any of these Democrat allegations, and none of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor,” said the draft report from Republican Reps. Devin Nunes of California on the Intelligence Committee, Jim Jordan of Ohio on the Oversight and Reform Committee and Michael McCaul of Texas on the Foreign Affairs Committee. "The fundamental disagreement apparent in the Democrats’ impeachment inquiry is a difference of world views and a discomfort with President Trump’s policy decisions."

The last is a crock. The House Intelligence Committee has been very specific in its charges against Trump, and none of it has to do with Trump's policies.

Also, Trump incriminated himself when he held up the military aid approved by Congress days before the July 25 call. Then, when Zelensky expressed interest in buying Javelins, Trump immediately replied, "I would like you to do us a favor, though."

The GOP defense is ridiculous, although I agree with them in one instance. Trump did not say, "President Zelensky, I am going to ask your government to interfere in our Presidential election for my personal benefit, then I will bribe you to provide incentive."

The report said there was nothing wrong with this request.

"None of the Democrats’ witnesses testified to having evidence of bribery, extortion, or any high crime or misdemeanor.” That is a lie. Several witnesses corroborated the extortion, but they didn't have to. Trump's chief of staff admitted that the money was held up to get Zelensky to investigate what Trump wanted investigated. The he told the nation, "Get over it." The GOP report made no mention of Mulvaney.

USA Today continues, "The report noted that Trump has a right to block witnesses and documents from being provided because the inquiry has been “an unfair, abusive, and partisan process, and does not constitute obstruction of a legitimate impeachment inquiry.'"

Republicans say this a lot. There is only one problem. They never say why the impeachment inquiry "does not constitute obstruction of a legitimate impeachment inquiry." Neither does this report. Trump Republicans just say it, and we are supposed to believe it on their say so alone.

This is a perfunctory defense of Trump because Nunes, Jordan, and McCall all know Trump is guilty as charged, and they are relying on Trump's flunkies in the Senate to exonerate him. Trump isn't even sending his lawyers to the hearings to defend him. Why bother? He is guilty.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Senate Republicans are all over the place when it comes to Trump's conspiracy theories. Kennedy from Louisiana has reversed himself twice. First, he says Ukraine interfered in our election. Then he said they didn't, and the Russians did it. Then, on Sunday, he said Ukraine did it.

Now Sen. Lindsey Graham, a Republican from South Carolina, has said, "I don’t know if it’s true or not. But let somebody look, but when it comes to hacking into the DNC, that was all Russia. The Ukraine had nothing to do with it. So as to the Ukraine, they had zero to do with the hacking of the DNC and the stealing of the emails."

Live updates: Democrats release Trump impeachment report - CNNPolitics

 

[Sandy Shanks]

Many watched Rep. Adam Schiff and his summary of the House Intelligence Committee's impeachment report. He was calm, professional, informative, and convincing. He was competent and skillful in his presentation.

This is our President:

“I learn nothing from Adam Schiff, I think he’s a maniac. I think Adam Schiff is a deranged human being. I think he grew up with a complex for lots of reasons that are obvious. I think he’s a very sick man, and he lies.”

Trump's press secretary said "Chairman Schiff’s report reads like the ramblings of a basement blogger straining to prove something when there is evidence of nothing.”

Trump's fans love this in their President.

 

[Leo123]

There are some who argue that, if the circumstances and evidence warrants it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House to impeach the President.

That is true. If the situation calls for it, it is the Constitutional duty of the House of Representatives to impeach the President. However, according to our Constitution, Congress has many Constitutional duties and sometimes they conflict with one another.

That is the case here. The ultimate purpose of impeaching the President is his removal from office. Impeachment is merely an indictment against the President. The trial to determine his removal from office takes place in the Senate with the chief justice presiding.

Therein lies the problem. As matters stand now, the 67 votes needed to remove Trump from office simply won't happen.

Indeed, the very opposite is likely to happen. When the Senate exonerates Trump, the sympathy vote could easily propel Trump toward another four years in office.

In terms of the purpose of impeachment, the very opposite result could happen, and it is extremely likely, as matters stand now, that Trump would not be removed from office.

Congress has another Constitutional duty. Through its oversight responsibilities, Congress has the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed of the very bad judgments and the false statements of a very bad President to enable Americans to remove the very bad President from office in the next election.

In the opinion of many, including the leadership in the House, the Constitutional duty to keep Americans informed has a higher calling than the Constitutional duty to impeach. Why? Because the former will achieve the desired result while the latter is likely to cause unwelcome, unintended consequences.

NOT.....No evidence.

 

[Sandy Shanks]

NOT.....No evidence.

This is why Democrats are so eager to impeach Trump. As you will see, so should Republicans.

“I would like you to do us a favor, though.”

This is from the transcript of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. It was provided by the White House. The following is a quote from Trump.

Good because I· heard you had a prosecutor who· was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States,· the woman., was bad news and the people she was dealing with in.the Ukraine.were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, there's a lot of.talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

“What you’re describing is a quid pro quo,” asserted the reporter. “We do that all the time,” replied [Trump's chief of staff] Mulvaney. “Did he also mention to me the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about it. But that’s it. That’s why we held up the money … I have news for everybody: Get over it. There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy.” ‘We Do That All the Time, Get Over It.’ Mulvaney Boasts About Ukraine Plot

After the July 25 phone call with Zelensky, as he usually does, Trump doubled down 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.”

Trump says China should investigate the Bidens, doubles down on Ukraine probe

There is no getting around it. It is all well and good that Republicans can say Trump did nothing to cause his removal from office, but if the Republicans in the Senate exonerate Trump, if Trump's fans continue to insist impeachment is a sham, then the Republican Party and Trump's fans are saying:

A) The President is permitted to ask for foreign interference in our elections to improve his chances of winning.

B) The President is permitted to use military aid approved by Congress to a country fighting Russian aggression as a means of extortion to compel a foreign leader to comply with his wishes.

C) To cover up his deeds, the President is permitted to use obstruction of justice.

D) The President is permitted to ignore Congressional oversight as mandated by our Constitution.

Is this what the Republican Party wants to be remember for?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

As expected, Trump will not challenge the evidence against him.

The Post writes, "Pat A. Cipollone, the White House counsel, indicated to the House Judiciary Committee on Friday that Trump would not be sending attorneys to its hearing on Monday, when the panel charged with drafting articles of impeachment will hear evidence from Intelligence Committee lawyers on the investigation into the president’s conduct toward Ukraine.

"The scathing, two-paragraph letter reiterated the White House’s protests that the Democrats’ impeachment investigation violated Trump’s due process rights. Cipollone did not explicitly say the White House would not participate in the House process going forward, but gave no indication that it would."

The letter is typically Trumpian. Trump makes accusations, but never explains them. In this case, the White House has made the claim that the "impeachment investigation violated Trump’s due process rights," but the two paragraph letter does not explain how the impeachment investigation is violating Trump's due process. In the case of the Judiciary Committee, they have invited Trump's lawyers and his witnesses. Schiff did the same in the open hearings of the Intelligence Committee. In both cases, Trump has refused then he turns around and says he is being denied due process while calling the Constitutionally mandated impeachment proceedings a hoax.

Trump is relying on lies and attempted deception. Those are the actions of a very guilty President.

 

[Leo123]

NOT.....No evidence.

This is why Democrats are so eager to impeach Trump. As you will see, so should Republicans.

“I would like you to do us a favor, though.”

This is from the transcript of the July 25 phone call between Trump and Zelensky. It was provided by the White House. The following is a quote from Trump.

Good because I· heard you had a prosecutor who· was very good and he was shut down and that's really unfair. A lot of people are talking about that, the way they shut your very good prosecutor down and you had some very bad people involved. Mr. Giuliani is a highly respected man. He was the mayor of New York City, a great mayor, and I would like him to call you. I will ask him to call you along with the Attorney General. Rudy very much knows what's happening and he is a very capable guy. If you could speak to him that would be great. The former ambassador from the United States,· the woman., was bad news and the people she was dealing with in.the Ukraine.were bad news so I just want to let you know that. The other thing, there's a lot of.talk about Biden's son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great.Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it ... It sounds horrible to me.

“What you’re describing is a quid pro quo,” asserted the reporter. “We do that all the time,” replied [Trump's chief of staff] Mulvaney. “Did he also mention to me the corruption related to the DNC server? Absolutely. No question about it. But that’s it. That’s why we held up the money … I have news for everybody: Get over it. There’s going to be political influence in foreign policy.” ‘We Do That All the Time, Get Over It.’ Mulvaney Boasts About Ukraine Plot

After the July 25 phone call with Zelensky, as he usually does, Trump doubled down 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.”

Trump says China should investigate the Bidens, doubles down on Ukraine probe

There is no getting around it. It is all well and good that Republicans can say Trump did nothing to cause his removal from office, but if the Republicans in the Senate exonerate Trump, if Trump's fans continue to insist impeachment is a sham, then the Republican Party and Trump's fans are saying:

A) The President is permitted to ask for foreign interference in our elections to improve his chances of winning.

B) The President is permitted to use military aid approved by Congress to a country fighting Russian aggression as a means of extortion to compel a foreign leader to comply with his wishes.

C) To cover up his deeds, the President is permitted to use obstruction of justice.

D) The President is permitted to ignore Congressional oversight as mandated by our Constitution.

Is this what the Republican Party wants to be remember for?

Why do you think Biden is afraid of the Ukraine investigating him? I mean if he has done nothing wrong he will be vindicated. Right?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

It would appear that Trump's fans are incapable of thinking beyond 2020.

Throughout his entire President, a majority of Americans have disapproved of Trump's performance. Trump is the least popular President in modern American history. The GOP has lost several key elections in 2018 and 2019 and they lost control of the House because of Trump.

In other words, in all likelihood Trump will lose in 2020.

Trump's fans ignore all the evidence -- they avoid it, actually -- and insist that Trump is innocent. They are totally unaware of the consequences of that judgment.

Most likely in 2021 a Democrat will become President. If not in 2021, then 2025, or at some point a Democrat will be in the Oval Office.

If Trump is declared innocent of asking a foreign government to intervene in our election on his behalf, if Trump is declared innocent of using bribery as an incentive, if Trump is declared innocent of obstructing justice when he clearly defied Congress, then Democratic Presidents will be allowed to continue the practice.

That possibility exists as early as Jan. 20, 2021. Do Trump's fans really want to grant that kind of power to Democratic Presidents?

 

[Sandy Shanks]

I watched the Judiciary Committee hearing today, and it was quite interesting. The Democrats concentrated on the evidence and what Trump did and said.

The Republicans on the committee were caught between a rock and hard spot. They are dealing with a President who, by his own words and those of his chief of staff, is guilty of a number of impeachable offenses. Consequently, they avoided the evidence and what Trump did and said, concentrating on the process, whistleblower, whistleblower's complaint which has been superseded by a mountain of evidence and testimony, Hunter and Joe Biden, the Mueller Report, the economy, job growth, and constant references to an election that took place three years ago.

It should be significant to Trump's fans that the Republicans were unable to deal with the evidence, and were helpless when it came to what Trump said and did.