if this were a real jury trial, Trump would clearly be guilty of jury tampering. Is this the analogous you really want to make?
If President Trump had evidence the jury was tampered, he’d arguably be justified in tampering with the jury himself. Now I’m not arguing that he is competent to do this, of course, but it may be within his…
(How am I doing Max?)
… Constitutional authority to tamper with juries and, it may be said, select the judge. Where is the law saying he can’t?
What is the intended action? What would represent ineptitude at this?
He was so inept in hunting corruption that he missed himself and his family?
He was so inept that he could only get one phone call made and it happened to be about Biden?
You need to explain how and why an inept dt would do this or else give up the ghost.
He watches too much FOX News and buys into all of the conspiracy theories. He doesn’t want to believe it was the Russians, because he lurves Putin so much! And her refuses to believe that he, in his great and unmatched wisdom, with all of his stable genius, that HE had Russian backing to steal the election and still barely won (lost the popular vote, in fact). Better to believe that someone else, Ukraine maybe, tried to help Clinton cheat, and he still won but the bigly-est margin evert, most people don’t know this, but those were numbers that have never been seen before. Whether he has truly convinced himself of these “facts” or whether he’d only prefer them to be true, I don’t know. I don’t think he knows, either.
And both of them are on film as little kids talking about the Statue of Liberty and what it means to be an American.
And your surprised because…?
It’s these sort of details which make this simulation both believable and unbelievable, know what I mean? 
Now, dammit, where’s that other-colored pill…
Editor’s note: Twins? Really? Do we really want to go there? Isn’t this circus story absurd enough?
What did I just say, ferchrissakes?
According to GQ, the brother is one of the people he went to with his concerns about the call.
Turns out those ellipses in the transcript were meaningful after all.
“Lt. Col. Alexander S. Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, told House impeachment investigators on Tuesday that the White House transcript of a July call between President Trump and Ukraine’s president omitted crucial words and phrases, and that his attempts to restore them failed, according to three people familiar with the testimony.”
“The rough transcript also contains ellipses at three points where Mr. Trump is speaking. Colonel Vindman told investigators that at the point of the transcript where the third set of ellipses appear, Mr. Trump said there were tapes of Mr. Biden.”
FWIW, Vindman’s patriotism is being ‘defended’, admittedly in a rather hollow way , but at least defended by more than a few senior Republicans in Congress. Politico article.
Man, I never would have expected the Republicans to question the service or loyalty of a decorated veteran who happened to oppose the President. Sure, debate the man’s ideas, but question his courage or patriotism? That’s the kind of thing Republicans just never used to do. Yep, one thing you could always count on was Republicans treating our servicemembers with respect. I guess this is just one more thing Trump has fundamentally changed about the Republican party.
Quoted for emphasis.
An impeachment isn’t a criminal trial, it is an inherently political act. The “jurors” (US Senate) can and do determine what the burden of proof that determines their individual votes themselves.
I have no doubt that there are current members of the Senate who would refuse to vote to remove Trump from office if there was videotape of him shooting someone dead, whereas these same people would have voted to remove Obama if there had been an uncorroborated rumor that Obama had jaywalked once when he was six years old.
It’s the worldview of a cult. Anyone who speaks against the cult leader must, by definition, be all things bad and wrong and evil.
Today’s testimony by that particular service member (Lt.Col. Vindman), of course, removed the last lingering thread of “reasonable” objection to impeaching Trump for his extortion of Ukraine: that is, that we have only “second hand” information about his extortionate remarks on the infamous phone call.
Chris Hayes seemed particularly struck by this, today:
Okay, I give up! I keep seeing this and I missed its origin. FPT* is obviously a way to refer to Trump, but what does it stand for? Fucking President Trump? Okay, but why the asterisk?
In her signature, she has “*Former President Trump” and something about “I can dream, can’t I” (paraphrased). Guess she forgot to add her sig line, this time.
Yep, and the decent Republicans of yesteryear never would have fallen for that. No way! Republicans have always held military service in the highest esteem! It’s only Trump who is an aberration! This isn’t who Republicans really are!
Well, sure, there was Max Cleland. But that was just that one other-
OK, OK. Yeah, John Kerry too. But surely-
Al Gore, yeah. I guess him too.
But other than them, when have Republicans shown disrespect for our military???
Well, I mean, I guess technically it was not that great to send a bunch of troops to get their arms and legs blown off for a pack of lies.
But other than that, you could always count on Republicans to stand by our uniformed servicemen and women! The point is, Trump is very, very, very different from mainstream Republicans.
Ooops. It’s actually “* “Former President Trump” – saying it until it becomes true.” :smack: And it is in her sig line. I’ll just shut up now.
and hearing this news, Fox reporters are convinced he is a double agent!