Posted on 02/05/2020 6:57:39 AM PST by where's_the_Outrage?
WASHINGTON — The Republican-led U.S. Senate is expected to acquit President Donald Trump on Wednesday at the end of his impeachment trial on charges that he abused his power in dealings with Ukraine and obstructed efforts to uncover the alleged misconduct.
Here is a summary of the reasons that Trump's Republicans, who control 53 seats in the 100-seat chamber, say he should not be removed from office:
* Trump did nothing wrong
* Trump's actions were wrong, but not impeachable
* Removal of Trump would upset voters
* Not enough evidence
* Let the voters decide
(Excerpt) Read more at msn.com ...
It was the Democrat partisan impeachment passed in a party line vote in the House of Representatives.
The day the Rats took the House you knew this was coming.
If it wasn’t Ukraine, they would have found another pretext to impeach the President. It wouldn’t have mattered what he did.
His real crime was winning the 2016 election and the Democrats have never forgiven him for it.
They forgot Schiff and Nadler are Assholes.
Absolutely!
Yes, there is a variety of reasons for not voting to convict. Republicans don’t have to be unified on exactly why. Like any “laundry list” argument, the litmus test is: does the strongest argument alone make a sufficient case? here, yes: there is no actual charge (”abuse of power” summarizes most opposition stances), no actual crime articulated & referenced (ICA not referenced), no legal axiom fundamentally transgressed (”perjury” need not be explained further). Word salad aside, House Democrats failed to actually explain the accusation with anything other than recursion.
Having confirmed the reasoning for item #1 on the laundry list, the rest are irrelevant. Verdict: acquit, for want of an actual charge.
And this is why the GOP is dead post Trump. The scum play politics instead of standing for the truth.
Hey Nancy,
Acquittal is forever!
The question isn’t what Trump thought or said in private, the question is what the Trump Administration did - and didn’t - do with the president’s acquiescence.And the question is also “Where do the Vinmans of the world get off presuming that the president does not set the foreign policy of the United States?"
A bipartisan acquittal, no wonder Crazy Nancy is losing her marbles, they must be in her mouth.
Well, because they told us on the day after his inauguration.
Why acquit? There was no crime. The articles should be dismissed as without merit. Nullify them.
What were his wrong actions?
The fence sitter's dream answer, akin to "kinder, gentler conservatism". Utter pablum crap.
“Trump’s actions were wrong, but not impeachable.”
Lamar Alexander had this opinion. Don’t understand what was inappropriate?
Bracketing an argument is useful. Address both extremes. If the concern remains outside all possibility, as indicated by the extremes, case closed.
Sometimes it’s worth taking on the “for sake of argument, let’s assume you’re right” stance. The worst case is, absurdly allowing for mind-reading, Trump actually intended to derail Biden by prompting appearance of investigation ... for which, in consequence, nothing happened. That would be a case of wrongthink, having no actual actionable consequences - extremely close to the line, but not yet crossing it.
Ergo, giving the Dems every conceedable point, there STILL is nothing impeachable. Had Schiff actually waited for Ukraine to formally announce the requested investigation, then he might have had something to work with - but he didn’t. Case closed.
I hope Spit votes against Trump. That would motivate the Utah voters to have him replaced.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.