Turley Exposes Republicans And Himself As Being Full Of Shionla

[BWK]

We are way beyond reasonable doubt with Trump, Mulvaney, Sondland, and along with about twelve witnesses cementing a Quid Pro Quo election conspiracy to collude with a foreign government. There is absolutely zero reasonable doubt to question Trump's guilt. And no one on the Right has produced such a doubt. Nor will they. The problem I see, Republicans really don't give a shit what Trump does or did. And this is what I have been witnessing with this party, even before Trump. It's a party that identifies with self interests and enrichment. It has no other function or interest.

Is quid pro quo a crime?

Turley's argument is that, since Trump didn't threaten to withhold military assistance in exchange for investigations in that phone call, the requirements for a bribery or an extortion charge are not met.

Did you read his text?

Again, this thread is not about what Republicans do or don't do, it's about Turley. For me, it is about the question whether or not he did serious damage to the case for impeachment, or any effective counter-arguments to marshal against him. Reading here and listening to lawmakers interviewed today, or to Committee members yesterday, the best case they make is we need to remove Trump (though we can't) because election. Oh, and "oath of office". It so happens I find that weak.

It's still a crime even though the money was eventually sent. The fact that they were using the money as leverage before they got caught, is a 100% clear cut case of classic bribery.

Bwhaaaaaaaaaa you fuckin idiot.

Quid Pro Joe Biden got a cool couple of million for his actions and so did his son... What did trump get? NOTHING BECAUSE HE ASKED FOR NOTHING...

Look at this ***** coward running from the subject to hide behind Biden. Can't debate the facts, so you go and run and hide. Poor thing!

 

[Olde Europe]

Turley's argument is that, since Trump didn't threaten to withhold military assistance in exchange for investigations in that phone call, the requirements for a bribery or an extortion charge are not met.

Then Turley's argument must be that the phone call exists in isolation, which is rubbish.

No, it must not. There is no witness heard so far who could testify to Trump having made that connection. They all presumed, or inferred, military aid was tied to investigations, or the announcement of same.

I think a better argument would be to read the memorandum a bit above fifth-grader level. To paraphrase:

Trump: The U.S. was very good to Ukraine. However, there was no reciprocity.

Zelenskyy: BTW, how about the Javelins?

Trump: I would like to do us a favor though. How about an investigation, or two?​

It took the Ukrainians at most a few hours, more likely just minutes, to figure out there was extortion, bribery, and a quid pro quo. You may bet the farm they analyzed their complete transcript forward, backward and sideward, and figured it out. The only possible answer, under normal circumstances, to the question about the Javelins would have been: "Don't you worry, the money is on its way, shortly." The Ukrainians knew that DoD in conjunction with DoS had given Ukraine a clean bill of health, all the requirements fulfilled for the funds to be apportioned, and therefore anything other than that answer would have set their hair on fire. Literally, just a few hours after the call, they contacted the DoD to inquire what was going on with military aid.

Everyone with a decent reading comprehension can figure it out. Maybe lawyers can't, but what do I know?

 

[Billy_Bob]

We are way beyond reasonable doubt with Trump, Mulvaney, Sondland, and along with about twelve witnesses cementing a Quid Pro Quo election conspiracy to collude with a foreign government. There is absolutely zero reasonable doubt to question Trump's guilt. And no one on the Right has produced such a doubt. Nor will they. The problem I see, Republicans really don't give a shit what Trump does or did. And this is what I have been witnessing with this party, even before Trump. It's a party that identifies with self interests and enrichment. It has no other function or interest.

Is quid pro quo a crime?

Turley's argument is that, since Trump didn't threaten to withhold military assistance in exchange for investigations in that phone call, the requirements for a bribery or an extortion charge are not met.

Did you read his text?

Again, this thread is not about what Republicans do or don't do, it's about Turley. For me, it is about the question whether or not he did serious damage to the case for impeachment, or any effective counter-arguments to marshal against him. Reading here and listening to lawmakers interviewed today, or to Committee members yesterday, the best case they make is we need to remove Trump (though we can't) because election. Oh, and "oath of office". It so happens I find that weak.

It's still a crime even though the money was eventually sent. The fact that they were using the money as leverage before they got caught, is a 100% clear cut case of classic bribery.

Bwhaaaaaaaaaa you fuckin idiot.

Quid Pro Joe Biden got a cool couple of million for his actions and so did his son... What did trump get? NOTHING BECAUSE HE ASKED FOR NOTHING...

Look at this ***** coward running from the subject to hide behind Biden. Can't debate the facts, so you go and run and hide. Poor thing!

Just pointing out that you *****'s are lying and will not hold your own accountable for a far more agrevious crime of actually defrauding the US of funds throught the corruption that Biden fostered through the Ukraine and his son by forcing them to fire the man who was going to put Biden jr in jail.. and old man Biden too when it was found out that Joe was being paid as well through an intermediary. You corrupt bastards are toast when we have both houses and the presidency in 2020... WE WILL DRAIN THE ******* SWAMP of your kind!

 

[BWK]

We are way beyond reasonable doubt with Trump, Mulvaney, Sondland, and along with about twelve witnesses cementing a Quid Pro Quo election conspiracy to collude with a foreign government. There is absolutely zero reasonable doubt to question Trump's guilt. And no one on the Right has produced such a doubt. Nor will they. The problem I see, Republicans really don't give a shit what Trump does or did. And this is what I have been witnessing with this party, even before Trump. It's a party that identifies with self interests and enrichment. It has no other function or interest.

Is quid pro quo a crime?

Turley's argument is that, since Trump didn't threaten to withhold military assistance in exchange for investigations in that phone call, the requirements for a bribery or an extortion charge are not met.

Did you read his text?

Again, this thread is not about what Republicans do or don't do, it's about Turley. For me, it is about the question whether or not he did serious damage to the case for impeachment, or any effective counter-arguments to marshal against him. Reading here and listening to lawmakers interviewed today, or to Committee members yesterday, the best case they make is we need to remove Trump (though we can't) because election. Oh, and "oath of office". It so happens I find that weak.

It's still a crime even though the money was eventually sent. The fact that they were using the money as leverage before they got caught, is a 100% clear cut case of classic bribery.

Bwhaaaaaaaaaa you fuckin idiot.

Quid Pro Joe Biden got a cool couple of million for his actions and so did his son... What did trump get? NOTHING BECAUSE HE ASKED FOR NOTHING...

Look at this ***** coward running from the subject to hide behind Biden. Can't debate the facts, so you go and run and hide. Poor thing!

Just pointing out that you *****'s are lying and will not hold your own accountable for a far more agrevious crime of actually defrauding the US of funds throught the corruption that Biden fostered through the Ukraine and his son by forcing them to fire the man who was going to put Biden jr in jail.. and old man Biden too when it was found out that Joe was being paid as well through an intermediary. You corrupt bastards are toast when we have both houses and the presidency in 2020... WE WILL DRAIN THE ******* SWAMP of your kind!

Lol! Trump hasn't even given Ukraine all the money you idiot, and you want to talk about a non-existent Biden scandal? Impeachment fact-check: Military funding did not get to Ukraine, shredding Trump defense

 

[Synthaholic]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

No he isn’t. He argued in favor of Clinton’s impeachment. He now says Democrats are moving too fast. Clinton was impeached in 72 days.

Today is day 72 of the Trump impeachment.

And for those who don’t know - an impeached president CANNOT be pardoned. This is why Nixon resigned before they could impeach him.

You poor guy

Once again, you got nothing, dope.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Some folks try so hard to appear "objective" that it makes them look sad....

They feel that if the tables were totally switched -- that these republicans that they are trying so hard to bend over backwards for -- will be just as fair and objective to them.....

You are 1000% right that republicans are blocking testimony, blocking witnesses, blocking additional evidence not because it proves Trump's innocence but because it will prove Trump's guilt beyond any reasonable doubt....even OldLady's ...as much as I respect her opinions...

Biff, you misunderstand me. I have no question in my mind that Trump is guilty as charged. What I had difficulty with was the very biased article you put up that dismisses the observations of a very experienced Constitutional lawyer. I think it is very clear to all that the Senate will not impeach the President; we all know that, but I am not sure it is SOLELY for partisan reasons. The evidence required in a trial is being obstructed by the President, YES, and the Dems have chosen to let him out of consideration for the time it would take to wrestle his cooperation.

I wish I was wrong and that Trump would be impeached by the Senate and removed from office for his behavior, but there is a game to be played here, first, and the Dems do not have winning hand. If this were their last full-blown attempt to change the voting public's mind before the election, it seems to have failed. At least polls show that people simply heard what they wanted to hear in all the testimony....it did not change many minds about the President at all.

Sorry days.

Just keep clear eyed about this and do not let yourself be sucked down into the ridiculous swamp of ad homs that the Republicans use to discredit the opposition.

Does that make sense to you?

You need to see a doctor immediately because you are obviously suffering a stroke. That was a well-reasoned response. Thank you! I guess there is a first time for everything!

I'm always well-reasoned.

No, well-seasoned maybe, but well-reasoned is not an apt descriptor for you. Everything you said was totally inaccurate regarding the facts, but you explained it completely, and that never happened before.

I've never understood why you take such a negative view of me; it seems to be almost personal.

Are you flirting?

No. I find you to be either a consummate liar or a total dumbass, depending on whether you really believe your own bullshit.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Some folks try so hard to appear "objective" that it makes them look sad....

They feel that if the tables were totally switched -- that these republicans that they are trying so hard to bend over backwards for -- will be just as fair and objective to them.....

You are 1000% right that republicans are blocking testimony, blocking witnesses, blocking additional evidence not because it proves Trump's innocence but because it will prove Trump's guilt beyond any reasonable doubt....even OldLady's ...as much as I respect her opinions...

Biff, you misunderstand me. I have no question in my mind that Trump is guilty as charged. What I had difficulty with was the very biased article you put up that dismisses the observations of a very experienced Constitutional lawyer. I think it is very clear to all that the Senate will not impeach the President; we all know that, but I am not sure it is SOLELY for partisan reasons. The evidence required in a trial is being obstructed by the President, YES, and the Dems have chosen to let him out of consideration for the time it would take to wrestle his cooperation.

I wish I was wrong and that Trump would be impeached by the Senate and removed from office for his behavior, but there is a game to be played here, first, and the Dems do not have winning hand. If this were their last full-blown attempt to change the voting public's mind before the election, it seems to have failed. At least polls show that people simply heard what they wanted to hear in all the testimony....it did not change many minds about the President at all.

Sorry days.

Just keep clear eyed about this and do not let yourself be sucked down into the ridiculous swamp of ad homs that the Republicans use to discredit the opposition.

Does that make sense to you?

When Clinton was impeached, the voting public was only 29% in favor of impeachment....not one republicans said anything about "impeachment is for changing the voting public's mind"

When Nixon resigned, at that point, the voting public was maybe 40% -- and that was before courts forced him to release the tapes...when that happened, he resigned because he knew...and even after the tapes were released, you still had people who didn't want him impeached -- those people are party sycophants and are irrelevant when it comes to impeachment....

Nearly 50% favor impeachment now, if Mulvaney, Giuliani, Bolton, Pompeo testified under oath -- the public would be well over 50% for impeachment, because none of them will lie under oath to protect Trump.....

But as I said before, impeachment isn't about the voting public, it is about making sure the next president DOES NOT think Article 2 gives them power to do whatever they want -- which is exactly what Trump actually said....

I have no concerns about future presidents possibly being impeached for impeachable offenses, because if they committed impeachable acts, they should be impeached....I am not a party sycophant so it wouldn't bother me....

impeachment isn't about the voting public, it is about making sure the next president DOES NOT think Article 2 gives them power to do whatever they want -- which is exactly what Trump actually said....
Yes. I agree.

Interesting about the % of the public that was behind our last two impeachment investigations. I know it isn't about votes--or it shouldn't be--but it is an election year and I do wonder why Pelosi is rushing this forward...could it be the Republicans are partly right? Yes, the President did wrong and got caught with his hand in the cookie jar up to his elbow. But to wrap this up before the voting booths open? The Dems will take advantage of the opportunity, don't you think?

There are too many facts in this case that support impeachment, and no one has been rushing. We have the mueller report that was enough as well, and we received that report a long time ago.

Okay. I hope you all are right and we get the old bastard out of 1600 Pennsylvania before any further damage is done. And at the rate they're going, we won't have to wait very long.

What damage? The unprecedented economy we are enjoying? The rebuilding of the US military? The record lows in unemployment? The serious declines in border crossings by illegals in recent months?

Where exactly do you see damage? oh, that's right! He beat Hillary and that alone justifies his impeachment.

 

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

It's amazing how fast the democrats will turn on and eat their own if they don't TOW THE LINE, and happen to say something that's outside their programming or agenda.

Which line and what are you towing? Is that anything like cowtowing like you said before?

 

[Mac1958]

I've been a fan of Turley's for a long time. More than any other "pundit" who appears on teevee, he displays virtually none of the dishonest partisan spin that the rest do. He's always calm, clear, straightforward, interesting and respectful. I'll stop what I'm doing to listen, because I know I'm not getting standard partisan babble.

From his piece for The Hill today:

As I said 21 years ago, a president can still be impeached for abuse of power without a crime, and that includes Trump. But that makes it more important to complete and strengthen the record of such an offense, as well as other possible offenses. I remain concerned that we are lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. Trump will not be our last president. What we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. These “agitated passions” will not be a substitute for proof in an impeachment. We currently have too much of the former and too little of the latter.

Looks like Turley and I are both sick of the constant lowering of standards we're seeing in this country.
.

 

[Olde Europe]

I've been a fan of Turley's for a long time. More than any other "pundit" who appears on teevee, he displays virtually none of the dishonest partisan spin that the rest do. He's always calm, clear, straightforward, interesting and respectful. I'll stop what I'm doing to listen, because I know I'm not getting standard partisan babble.

From his piece for The Hill today:

As I said 21 years ago, a president can still be impeached for abuse of power without a crime, and that includes Trump. But that makes it more important to complete and strengthen the record of such an offense, as well as other possible offenses. I remain concerned that we are lowering impeachment standards to fit a paucity of evidence and an abundance of anger. Trump will not be our last president. What we leave in the wake of this scandal will shape our democracy for generations to come. These “agitated passions” will not be a substitute for proof in an impeachment. We currently have too much of the former and too little of the latter.

Looks like Turley and I are both sick of the constant lowering of standards we're seeing in this country.

There is no such thing as a "constant lowering of standards". Rather, there is a collapse of standards, as brought about by Trump. If Turley were really concerned with standards, he'd be making the most forceful case for impeachment possible. He'd be pointing out ways how to navigate the process in the face of all-out obstruction from the White House. He'd be advising everyone how properly to read the memorandum on the Trump-Zelenskyy phone call, not to mention the 300-page Intelligence Committee report, rather than to pretend to see nothing impeachable.

So, what we get instead is a forceful advocacy that makes the best case against impeachment, accompanied by the most feeble remarks against Trump, like (paraphrasing), the Bidens should not have been mentioned in the phone call. He would, as a constitutional scholar, particularly recognize that a president who would state, openly, "I have an article II where I have the right to do whatever I want", is a clear and present danger to democracy and the rule of law, and would work his flabby arse off to make the case that he need be reigned in at least, or much rather removed.

So, what we get is constant virtue signaling while he vigorously and diligently licks Trump's boots - while complaining about mere manners. There ain't much of a question why Mac likes him so much.

Oh, and BTW, have a link to Turley's strident whining on The Hill. Providing same would be required posting standards, but...

 

[Polishprince]

If they're the shinola, you must be the shit.

Fair enough.

I think our ultraliberal friend is like a lot of ultralibs and can't tell the difference between Shit and Shinola

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

 

[BWK]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

If the Dems/Biden did nothing wrong....what do they have to hide?
Let's appoint a Special Counsel.

 

[Butch_Coolidge]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Biff_Poindexter]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

If the Dems/Biden did nothing wrong....what do they have to hide?
Let's appoint a Special Counsel.

How does Obama personally benefit (to the exclusion of the whole country) -- by getting a prosecutor fired for NOT INVESTIGATING CORRUPTION??

Also, when Obama talked about fighting corruption in the Ukraine and abroad -- he was always able to speak in detail about various instances of corruption....Trump has NEVER spoke about any kind of corruption in Ukraine without bringing up Crowdstrike and Biden's son....Funny how a country with tons of corruption, the only examples you bring up are 2 conspiracy theories that have been debunked??

Maybe because it wasn't about investigating corruption, it was about trying to damage a political opponent for an election.....I tell you what, instead of whining and saying "but but but Obama!!!" --- how about you build an international coalition of NATO, IMF and others to agree with you that Biden and Crowdstrike should be investigated...because that is exactly what Obama had...an international coalition -- which is the exact opposite of "personal benefit" --- you dumb ass

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

If the Dems/Biden did nothing wrong....what do they have to hide?
Let's appoint a Special Counsel.

How does Obama personally benefit (to the exclusion of the whole country) -- by getting a prosecutor fired for NOT INVESTIGATING CORRUPTION??

Also, when Obama talked about fighting corruption in the Ukraine and abroad -- he was always able to speak in detail about various instances of corruption....Trump has NEVER spoke about any kind of corruption in Ukraine without bringing up Crowdstrike and Biden's son....Funny how a country with tons of corruption, the only examples you bring up are 2 conspiracy theories that have been debunked??

Maybe because it wasn't about investigating corruption, it was about trying to damage a political opponent for an election.....I tell you what, instead of whining and saying "but but but Obama!!!" --- how about you build an international coalition of NATO, IMF and others to agree with you that Biden and Crowdstrike should be investigated...because that is exactly what Obama had...an international coalition -- which is the exact opposite of "personal benefit" --- you dumb ass

How does Obama personally benefit

Hiding his VP's corruption doesn't benefit Obama?

Maybe because it wasn't about investigating corruption, it was about trying to damage a political opponent for an election

If Biden drops out, then we can investigate Hunter's no show payday?

 

[BWK]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

If the Dems/Biden did nothing wrong....what do they have to hide?
Let's appoint a Special Counsel.

It's an irrelevant investigation because Trump and his goons already got caught conspiring to collude with a foreign government against their opponent. Launch a separate investigation into Biden if that is what you want. But Trump's crime was already completed. He fucked up. Time to impeach this criminal now.

 

[BWK]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

If the Dems/Biden did nothing wrong....what do they have to hide?
Let's appoint a Special Counsel.

How does Obama personally benefit (to the exclusion of the whole country) -- by getting a prosecutor fired for NOT INVESTIGATING CORRUPTION??

Also, when Obama talked about fighting corruption in the Ukraine and abroad -- he was always able to speak in detail about various instances of corruption....Trump has NEVER spoke about any kind of corruption in Ukraine without bringing up Crowdstrike and Biden's son....Funny how a country with tons of corruption, the only examples you bring up are 2 conspiracy theories that have been debunked??

Maybe because it wasn't about investigating corruption, it was about trying to damage a political opponent for an election.....I tell you what, instead of whining and saying "but but but Obama!!!" --- how about you build an international coalition of NATO, IMF and others to agree with you that Biden and Crowdstrike should be investigated...because that is exactly what Obama had...an international coalition -- which is the exact opposite of "personal benefit" --- you dumb ass

They won't do it because there is nothing there. It's all make believe. Impeach the criminal bastard Trump now.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Turley is a democrat,, he’s trying to save you people for the sickness of TDS

Uh huh......I like how you avoided every fact I presented.....

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

That has already been proven.....this Trump era will not age well for his sycophants....

Hope you still got them cute little tea-party hats and "I'm An Independent" t-shirts in storage somewhere....you will be needing them in your next re-branding campaign

Especially this one...…..""The use of military aid for a quid pro quo to investigate one’s political opponent, if proven, can be an impeachable offense.”

Exactly!
Dem corruption must be hidden.
Biden's corruption must never be exposed.

Too bad you don't have proof. And too bad you are a liar.

If the Dems/Biden did nothing wrong....what do they have to hide?
Let's appoint a Special Counsel.

It's an irrelevant investigation because Trump and his goons already got caught conspiring to collude with a foreign government against their opponent. Launch a separate investigation into Biden if that is what you want. But Trump's crime was already completed. He fucked up. Time to impeach this criminal now.

Trump and his goons already got caught conspiring to collude with a foreign government against their opponent.

Is that like getting a British spy to get info from Russian spies and then getting Australian diplomats to talk to campaign staffers?

Launch a separate investigation into Biden if that is what you want.

I agree. We must not allow Dem corruption to remain hidden