LOL - It's no wonder you folks are so easily influenced with fake news... I haven't lived in Southern California for about 10 years and it's been about 56 years since my father, an aerospace engineer, was invited to immigrate here with his family. (I was 2 years old at the time).

I grew up in a town in Southern CA where we played soccer in school more than we played football because every other kid had a European dad. Ya know why? Because the American aerospace industry was almost entirely dependent on engineers from Europe, that's why. And things haven't changed that much since then... I'm a software engineer by trade and I am surrounded by Russians and Asians because as always America depends on immigrants. Even the colonists were failing push the British out until the French came to help.

I wasn't asking what YOU thought, Pumpkin.

I think the Russians will find 2020 a little more challenging than 2016 was, but you can always hope. ;)

I dunno - does kemmer see you as less than manly?

Well, the Republicans have certainly turned it into a political show, which is why I'm over it. The House Democrats did what they needed to do. When faced with sufficient evidence that a president was abusing his power, they impeached him, thereby maintaining their relevance and their constitutional value. So if the Republicans want to show the world how they prioritize partisan politics over constitutional integrity, that's their decision.


LOL - you took the words right out of my mouth.

quid = the money Congress already allocated for you.
quo = an announcement that you are investigating the Bidens.

Pretty simple, really. I guess none of the smoke and mirrors worked on me because I still remember the actual charges.


I would agree if that were the case.


Abuse of power and obstruction of Congress, as in the two articles of impeachment. Did you forget those already?

Or is this about that absurd argument that a president can't be impeached unless he commits a crime as defined in criminal code? Maybe if you actually read the Constitution.... You can do it, it's not that hard. Here, I'll even help...

The Constitution, Article II, Section 4:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

Bribery isn't even buried in the pile of whatever high Crimes means... Bribery is actually stated as an impeachable offense in a manner than could NOT be any clearer. And now we have these "fixers" actually trying to justify the bribery. The comedy is priceless.


Trump's attempt to bribe the president of the Ukraine wasn't just a thought. Nor were his orders to his staff to refuse cooperation with Congress.


I see. So this an emotional issue for you based on your hatred for the progressive stereotype. (yawn)

Consider their audience... Both sides of the Senate can see right through their BS, but that isn't who they're appealing to. They are trying to convince the barely-literate constituencies in Republican districts so as to apply pressure to the respective senators to stay loyal to their fuhrer or lose their offices. "Head on a pike" as that White House aide said.

Of course I am, sweetheart. But I'm jonesing right now 'cause my suppliers are busy on Capitol Hill defending Trump. LOL

Bullschitt... how clever. You should call Trump and ask if he needs any help with his defense. You can say that you come up with clever names for people. ;)

Ha, ha, ha... That doesn't even make any sense. Look, it's obvious that you thought you were saying flatulation.

The Bidens have nothing to do with any of this. Trump was caught bribing Zellensky, which is a clear violation of the Constitution and now his defense is actually trying to justify it by claiming it was a legitimate request for an investigation into something for which there is no evidence whatsoever.

Even if the Bidens are guilty of... well, anything... it wouldn't make any difference because there are already procedures and protocols for initiating investigations abroad and Trump didn't follow ANY of them. Instead, he chose to bribe Zellensky, which is STILL a violation of the Constitution.

So keep firing off lame excuses and distractions... I'll be right here to bat everyone of them out of the park... I gotta say winning arguments is sooo easy when the other side is trying to hide the truth.

LOL... do you even know what "infatuation" means?

This "game" only started 4 month ago willy. Apparently, you're suffering from the same hatred that drives others to the kind of delusion that blurs everything into one big war with the "libtards".


Oh, you mean the new rules that say the president is above the law and he can do whatever he wants? Or do you mean the new rules that say in a trial only the defense is allowed to call witnesses?


Well, that explains YOUR ignorance. LOL



"Now class... as you can see there are three apples on my desk. Can everyone see them?"
"Yes."
"Now, if I take one away, how many are left?"
"2"
"That's right Johnny"
"WRONG!"
"Who said that? Was that you Willy?"
"Yes."
"Why do you think Johnny's answer is wrong?"
"Because you say he's right and you're a libtard and I hate libtards."
"Oh..."

Yup... the Republican strategy is to rely on that willful ignorance that Trump himself depends on to generate pressure on Republican lawmakers.

So, not like this...
(Dershowitz) ---/argument/--- (senators)
...because senators know better.

More like this...
(Dershowitz) ---/argument/--- (Fox News) ---/amplify/ --- (deplorables) --- /votes/--- (senators)
...because leveraging the ignorance and pride among the people has always been an effective path to power for those who don't deserve it.

I don't know much about Dershowitz's history but how about the fact that he stood in front of Congress and said that Trump's quid-pro-quo is a standard practice in foreign policy? LOL

Aside from virtually admitting that there WAS a quid-pro-quo (Trump's defense can't seem to make up their minds on that one) He is now left with this absurd need to justify it and so this is what he came up with. Sometimes, even an expert can say really stupid things that ANYONE can see through, especially when politics in involved.

Yes, it's standard practice to stipulate terms on our foreign aid, but these terms are always clearly and publicly defined AND agreed upon IN writing BEFORE the aid is approved, not covertly hinted at in coy conversations. And the formal stipulations of foreign aid always involve long-term policies and conditions that benefit the relationship between nations not personal favors.

Dershowitz was obviously trying to blur that line. I'm sure it didn't work on ANYONE in the chamber but I'm sure that's not the point either. I'm sure the point is to convince the lesser educated public into supporting the president.