Looking for facts in this monolith of a paragraph:
Faith writes:
By falsely representing everything concerning Trump for starters and treating the lies as valid charges.
Fake claim.
They have no actually impeachable charges, they made them up and are pretending they have some kind of legal standing which they do not.
Bald assertion, fake claim, rebutted at least several times and never responded to other than by bald assertion.
The impeachment clause is very very clear: Bribery and treason, high crimes and misdemeanors,...
This is accurate and factual. It's pretty much what the Constitution says, not verbatim, but that doesn't matter.
...on a level that threatens the American government.
This is not in the Constitution, but it's implicit. I think we all accept this. But it's not just threats to the government but to the nation, to democracy, and to the people. Conspiring to steal an election through foreign entanglements is, according to the writings of the founders, one of the highest crimes possible.
The charges they've brought are hot air,...
Vacuous statement.
...and totally unrelated to the Constitutional standard required.
Bald and unsupported declaration, fake claim.
Denying due process to the defendant was an egregious miscarriage of American principles,...
It has been explained to you many times why Trump was not denied due process, yet instead of addressing those explanations you still just baldly repeat this false accusation. Your inability to muster any facts in support is telling you your claim is false.
...and rationalizing that as unnecessary because not specified in so many words is just a weaselly undermining of all principles of fairness and justice America has always defined itself by.
Childish name calling and false objection made in the absence of any facts or rationale.
This whole proceeding is a disgustinhg fraud, a horrific parody at best, a violation of everything America has always represented.
Now you're upping the ante on childish name calling and fake claims.
I'm so sorry there are people who do not see this...
See what? You've offered only bald, unsupported declarations, fake claims, hysterical outrage and childish name calling. What is there to see?
...but accept this travesty as something legitimate.
Bald, unsupported declaration, fake claim.
This going from accusation to accusation over three years is a pathetic piece of evidence of the emptiness of the whole endeavor.
Calling attention to Trump malfeasances is usually straightforward because he often does them out in the open, many times while making a statement before boarding a helicopter. Holding him accountable is much more difficult because impeachment is the only remedy. Hence, short of impeachment, calling attention to Trump improprieties is all that is possible.
The make a big noise about this or that supposed criminal activity by Trump and then of course when it turns out to be false they don't acknowledge it they just go on and make up another criminal activity.
Fake claim, baseless declaration. Trump has likely done almost everything he's been accused of, nothing has been found false, but while president he cannot be brought to trial and the charges examined in a court of law.
How you all here can take this charade seriously I really cannot fathom.
We take Trump's crimes seriously because they are supported by facts that you are unable to address. Your fellow traveler in this thread also has a very distant relationship with facts. He's also unable to maintain continuity in discussion, taking a free association approach where one thing reminds him of another that has nothing to do with the discussion.
Talk about the Twilight Zone.
Yes, that's an appropriate analogy for your baseless opinions.
Adam Schiff and the whole House team are just making it up as they go.
Adam Schiff chairs the House Intelligence Committee which took testimony from a number of Trump administration witnesses who detailed Trump's scheme to coerce the Ukraine to open an investigation into the Bidens. You may find the report with all its evidence and many details here:
The Turmp-Ukraine Impeachment Inquiry Report
Why on earth do you treat such stuff with any dignity whatever?
Because of the supporting facts. Why don't you deal with the facts instead of issuing post after post of this empty vacuous stuff.
I can't fathom why anyone does.
Because of the facts. When you hide your head in the sand you can't complain because it's dark.
It's a blot on the Constitution, a blot on the institutions of America.
What's going on right now is a blot on the Senate, not the Constitution. 53% of the Senate seems to be thumbing their noses at the Constitution. Many do not seem to be taking their oath to render impartial justice. What we're hearing is many complaints that they're not hearing anything new (that was pretty much guaranteed when they voted against subpoenaing Bolton and Mulvaney) and that the presentation is repetitive (House managers guilty as charged). What do you think of jurors who vote for acquittal not because the facts demand it but because they didn't get to hear from witnesses that they themselves voted not to hear, and because the facts were presented multiple times. How does one make an argument that you would have found the defendant guilty based on the facts, but you found him innocent because the facts were described too many times? How does one justify a complaint that the key witnesses did not appear when one voted against calling those witnesses?
Concerning witnesses and documents, the Senate faces the same problem that the House did, that such subpoenas would be challenged and have to wend their way through the courts, which could take months. The House probed how resistant the judiciary might be to expedited hearings on the subpoenas and found it likely they would take months, and in those months Trump would be able to carry out more schemes to steal the election. Giuiani is busily working on this right now. Just yesterday he was on Fox & Friends promising to soon bring evidence that Russian interference in the 2016 election was a hoax, that it was all Ukraine, and that the Bidens had corruptly taken up to $20 million out of the Ukraine.
But the Senate in the heat of an impeachment trial may be better able to influence the judiciary to move quickly so that the court cases can be completed before the election and the witnesses heard and the documentation presented.
Members of the Senate must also consider that the information they say they want, namely testimony of top officials of the Trump administration and direct documentation, will not remain bottled up forever. Trump can stonewall and and keep things bottled up this year, but not forever. The proof of the corruption of this administration will gradually become public as the years go by through people finally going public and through Freedom of Information Act requests. And when Trump finally leaves office he'll be the subject of many lawsuits.
Another dramatic possibility lies in our future should Trump lose the election: he'll call the election a fraud and refuse to leave office.
--Percy
™ Version 4.2
(1)