The Trump Impeachment Trial

How clear it is depends on the person. The Constitution is deliberately quite ambiguous on this point. It comes down to “do you think this is bad enough to qualify for removal from office?”. There’s no technically correct or incorrect answer - this is politics.

I think this is where you’ve been going wrong in this discussion. You keep trying to apply some technical legal standard, or something like that. But it’s much more simple - do you think this action warrants removal due to the harm it does to our country? That’s it.

So true. I mean gravity is only a theory, amirite?

“The truth has cost LTC Alexander Vindman his job, his career, and his privacy,”

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/02/07/donald-trump-pressure-impeachment-witness-alexander-vindman-111997

Sure Trump learned his lesson… it was that he should not have honest persons checking what he does.

Mitt Romney gave a very good example while refuting the notion that there couldn’t be any abuse of power without a crime. It was (I’m paraphrasing) - what if the President pardoned every single Republican currently in prison without pardoning any Democrats. That would clearly be an abuse of power, even though it’s not a crime.

Josh Marshall said it today – Trump did absolutely learn a lesson from the impeachment – he learned he could do absolutely anything and his party would back him up. Firing patriots like Vindman is just the beginning. And the GOP won’t do a damn thing about it.

Looks like Sondland is out too. https://twitter.com/Kevinliptakcnn/status/1225927262949822469

What do we call this…

Friday Night Massacre?
Night of the Long Tweets?
The Trumpening?

The day that most of the country was tuned out, except a small few who believed that the matter was of fundamental importance to the future of their nation and spent those days in sadness.

Not pithy, but I can’t think of a smaller version.

This might be good for dems in 2020. It’s who he really is, and it was pent up for a couple of years during mueller and impeachment. I think undecideds will register this.

The Empikening

Pistol Knocked

The Empiker Strikes Back

The Il Douchening

Darth Hitler.

(Oh, you thought this already was his Dark side…)

Did Trump or his legal team bring one shred of exculpatory evidence?

Nope not a bit. Not a thing.

They did however try to ignore the constitution, and attempt to say that extortion really isn’t illegal.

That was the ‘defense’. A joke.

Ya know, extortion of an ally for personal gain using hundreds of millions of USA dollars isn’t THAT bad. And heck, he was helping out his BFFF Vlad.

What’s next?

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/giuliani-trump-ukraine-pressure-campaign-perfectly-justifiable

Guiliani says that evidence is coming over the next couple of months about how Il Douche was totally justified in all of his perfect actions! Not now, you understand, because its too soon. Couple of months, amazing stuff, incredible!

Louisiana GOP censured Mitt Romney. They said nothing when former KKK leader David Duke ran for Senate as the GOP candidate in 1990 and he got 43% of the vote.

Majority of Americans don’t believe the impeachment trial exonerated Trump.

But what does “unfairly” mean? Il Douche quite agrees with that word, he thinks it was “unfair”.

He thinks it was unfair to conduct at all, not that it was conducted unfairly.

I think for Trump, “unfair” means anything not sufficiently obsequious enough towards him.