They all know crimes were committed...

[Unregistered]

The only argument is over how much truth or evidence these clowns want to see. They want to be able say there wasn’t enough evidence, so they voted against a guilty verdict. New conservative puss$ies. We need real conservatives again. These guys are cowards.

[Unregistered]

The only argument is over how much truth or evidence these clowns want to see. They want to be able say there wasn’t enough evidence, so they voted against a guilty verdict. New conservative puss$ies. We need real conservatives again. These guys are cowards.

No new witnesses or evidence, Trump refusing to let staff testify or produce requested documents, debates at midnight when Americans won't pay attention....what are they so afraid of? The truth.

[Unregistered]

No new witnesses or evidence, Trump refusing to let staff testify or produce requested documents, debates at midnight when Americans won't pay attention....what are they so afraid of? The truth.

So the Dems have overwhelming, rock solid evidence and impeach Trump in the House but need more time and witnesses to try their case??? Everyone knows that’s not what the Senate does including Schitz and his clowns. They’re supposed to bring their evidence of impeachment to the floor of the Senate not ask for more time and witnesses. No wonder they couldn’t get a single Republican vote. That’s not the way the system works. How the hell did they vote for impeachment without completing an investigation? They had every opportunity to go through the courts to get subpoenas but chose not to. Everyone including the libtards know this was nothing more than a political hit job. Now the Dems are crying about fairness. I’ve never witnessed a more incompetent group of idiots.

[Unregistered]

So the Dems have overwhelming, rock solid evidence and impeach Trump in the House but need more time and witnesses to try their case??? Everyone knows that’s not what the Senate does including Schitz and his clowns. They’re supposed to bring their evidence of impeachment to the floor of the Senate not ask for more time and witnesses. No wonder they couldn’t get a single Republican vote. That’s not the way the system works. How the hell did they vote for impeachment without completing an investigation? They had every opportunity to go through the courts to get subpoenas but chose not to. Everyone including the libtards know this was nothing more than a political hit job. Now the Dems are crying about fairness. I’ve never witnessed a more incompetent group of idiots.

Your ignorance of the impeachment process is astounding.

You are aware that both of the previous impeachment trials in our nation's history had witness testimony and documentary evidence, right?

They couldn't get a single Republican vote because the entire party is corrupt to the core. Whether it's money, blackmail, ideology, personal power, or some combination of these corrupting any individual Senate is unknown. But all of them are certainly behaving as if they are compromised for some reason or another.

Or do you not care about the separation of powers and are perfectly fine with our legislature ceding all remaining shred of authority to the executive branch? Because that is precisely what is at stake here.

[Unregistered]

Your ignorance of the impeachment process is astounding.

You are aware that both of the previous impeachment trials in our nation's history had witness testimony and documentary evidence, right?

They couldn't get a single Republican vote because the entire party is corrupt to the core. Whether it's money, blackmail, ideology, personal power, or some combination of these corrupting any individual Senate is unknown. But all of them are certainly behaving as if they are compromised for some reason or another.

Or do you not care about the separation of powers and are perfectly fine with our legislature ceding all remaining shred of authority to the executive branch? Because that is precisely what is at stake here.

The GOP better be careful what it wishes for. When a Dem is in the WH (soon? later?) and attempts to do something similar, what will their position be then?

[Unregistered]

From Rick Wilson, Republican political strategist, media consultant, and author based in Florida who has produced televised political commercials for governors, U.S. Senate candidates, super PACs, and corporations.

I'll summarize this for the slow learners in the Senate one last time. Your protestations of independence, integrity, and honor will mean nothing to the voters this Fall. Nothing. You're going to moo and walk into the chute like cattle, terrified of Trump and Mitch.

So when you're underwater in the polls, drowning in public anger at becoming accessories to Trump's coverup, here's a handy list of what went wrong. Clip-and-save, because you'll need it later.

WHAT WENT WRONG, A PARTIAL LIST:

A. The facts of Ukraine will never, ever get better for Trump. You know this.

B. Truth outs. Bolton's book hits. Documents leak. More people come forth.

C. *TRUMP* admits it. You know he will.

D. The polls are not going your way. Two-thirds of the American people want to see evidence and witnesses. Support for
impeachment is steady.

E. The McConnell strategy looks great in the short term as a DC-clever-process story in a few months looks like a massive coverup.

F. The locked-room, one-camera, dead-of-night game YOU voted for looks more and more like the work of co-conspirators, not judges.

G. Trump won't help you later. His loyalty is to himself. If you're in trouble *even for helping him* you're dead meat.

H. Even if he *does* help you, does it *help* you? Trump rally fever plays only to the reddest red audiences. You know, like Maine and AZ...oh. Wait.

I. Mitch only has so much money to spread around. Sure, in January he's saying, "I got you" but does he have *enough*?

J. Even *Mitch* will flip if the majority is in danger, and how are you gonna walk that back? You won't get a second chance to be strong and do the right thing. You won't get another moment to show you give a damn about something bigger than Trump's rage.

K. Voters hate corruption (cf, 1974, 1980, 1994, 2006) as just a few examples in recent memory) and they hate its enablers more. It reinforces their existing feelings about politics and politicians.

L. Trump gets passes you never, ever will.

M. "I voted against witnesses and evidence and covered up Trump's crimes of obstruction, lying, and abuse of power so he wouldn't tweet mean things about me." is a **** political obituary. So is, "I didn't want a primary."

N. Everything Trump Touches Dies.

Proceed accordingly.

[Unregistered]

^ There are 35 Senate seats up for re-election 23 currently GOP held. Several are at risk states like Maine, Arizona. That's a lot of seats to defend even in a normal cycle, let alone this one where voters can clearly see the GOP puts party above country.

[Unregistered]

^ There are 35 Senate seats up for re-election 23 currently GOP held. Several are at risk states like Maine, Arizona. That's a lot of seats to defend even in a normal cycle, let alone this one where voters can clearly see the GOP puts party above country.

If we have an untainted election, I think the GOP is in for some serious surprises. Senate races are already seeing money pouring in from states like ours without a 2020 seat in play. Collins' opponent, for example, is going to be handed a windfall on June 10 when the general election season begins. One PAC designated for the Democratic challenger to Collins currently has $3,814,665 in the coffers.

[Unregistered]

Your ignorance of the impeachment process is astounding.

You are aware that both of the previous impeachment trials in our nation's history had witness testimony and documentary evidence, right?

They couldn't get a single Republican vote because the entire party is corrupt to the core. Whether it's money, blackmail, ideology, personal power, or some combination of these corrupting any individual Senate is unknown. But all of them are certainly behaving as if they are compromised for some reason or another.

Or do you not care about the separation of powers and are perfectly fine with our legislature ceding all remaining shred of authority to the executive branch? Because that is precisely what is at stake here.

You were doing great up til the point of labeling every Republican in the House and Senate as corrupt. Your own bias is staggering. Im sorry your party of clowns is having a problem making their case. Maybe it isn’t a strong as you hoped. Heck, the Clinton Impeachment at least got bipartisan support. Let me ask you something. Is withholding documents and access to witnesses obstruction and high crimes and misdemeanors?

[Unregistered]

The GOP better be careful what it wishes for. When a Dem is in the WH (soon? later?) and attempts to do something similar, what will their position be then?

Why does it matter? Look how Pelosi, Nadler, and Schumer all flipped from their stance on the Clinton impeachment. These were the same clowns who pushed for Executive Privilege and were against more witnesses. The hypocrisy shown by the Democrats is astonishing!

[Unregistered]

If we have an untainted election, I think the GOP is in for some serious surprises. Senate races are already seeing money pouring in from states like ours without a 2020 seat in play. Collins' opponent, for example, is going to be handed a windfall on June 10 when the general election season begins. One PAC designated for the Democratic challenger to Collins currently has $3,814,665 in the coffers.

"Untainted' and "GOP" cannot be used in the same post. The GOP will cheat in November, without or without the Russians.

[Unregistered]

Is withholding documents and access to witnesses obstruction and high crimes and misdemeanors?

Yes because it violates the separation of powers in the US Constitution he swore an oath to uphold and defend. He is thumbing his nose at Congress' oversight authority. Hell, he's bragging about it openly at Davos. That's literally one of the articles of impeachment. You do know that, right?

Until an elected Republican actually stands up to Trump's willfully criminal and corrupt behavior, I can only assume the corruption is rampant by default. What you permit you promote.

[Unregistered]

Why does it matter? Look how Pelosi, Nadler, and Schumer all flipped from their stance on the Clinton impeachment. These were the same clowns who pushed for Executive Privilege and were against more witnesses. The hypocrisy shown by the Democrats is astonishing!

Actually, the willful ignorance of the Republicans who refuse to acknowledge that lying about a blow job is not even in the same ballpark, let alone analogous, to the abuse of power and crimes that Trump is accused of is astonishing. Equating jeopardizing our national security, illegally withholding congressionally approved funds, and seeking foreign intervention in our elections to covering up a sex act? Really? Really now?

Those same "clowns" weren't against having witnesses, they were against a ridiculous list of irrelevant witnesses who could shed no more light on the events. The same thing these Democrats are arguing today when pointing out it would be stupid to subpoena the Bidens as witnesses.

Oh the horrors of wanting to hear from people who were actually in the room. Which by the way, is what the GOP was whining about during the House hearings. So which is it? Do they want witnesses who were in the room or not? Why was it something the GOP snarled about as unfair about the witnesses they did hear in November, but won't countenance in January? Hmmmm?

[Unregistered]

Actually, the willful ignorance of the Republicans who refuse to acknowledge that lying about a blow job is not even in the same ballpark, let alone analogous, to the abuse of power and crimes that Trump is accused of is astonishing. Equating jeopardizing our national security, illegally withholding congressionally approved funds, and seeking foreign intervention in our elections to covering up a sex act? Really? Really now?

Those same "clowns" weren't against having witnesses, they were against a ridiculous list of irrelevant witnesses who could shed no more light on the events. The same thing these Democrats are arguing today when pointing out it would be stupid to subpoena the Bidens as witnesses.

Oh the horrors of wanting to hear from people who were actually in the room. Which by the way, is what the GOP was whining about during the House hearings. So which is it? Do they want witnesses who were in the room or not? Why was it something the GOP snarled about as unfair about the witnesses they did hear in November, but won't countenance in January? Hmmmm?

Where is the abuse of power? Seriously, where is it? If you’re referring to withholding money to Ukraine then you’re the biggest hypocrite on here. Are you really saying it’s abuse of power to withhold Ukrainian money for a favor or a desired result? Really? Really now? What Obama and Biden did was far more egregious. There is a big difference between asking someone to look into something and ordering Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating the company who employs the VPOTUS son. Let’s talk about the people in the room. According to House testimony nobody testified to quid pro quo or bribery. Their own star witness finally had to admit under oath that he only ”presumed” a quid pro quo and that Trump actually instructed no quid pro quo. The simple fact that DC can garner bipartisan support for a blow job just goes to show how weak your case is.

[Unregistered]

Where is the abuse of power? Seriously, where is it? If you’re referring to withholding money to Ukraine then you’re the biggest hypocrite on here. Are you really saying it’s abuse of power to withhold Ukrainian money for a favor or a desired result? Really? Really now? What Obama and Biden did was far more egregious. There is a big difference between asking someone to look into something and ordering Ukraine to fire the prosecutor investigating the company who employs the VPOTUS son. Let’s talk about the people in the room. According to House testimony nobody testified to quid pro quo or bribery. Their own star witness finally had to admit under oath that he only ”presumed” a quid pro quo and that Trump actually instructed no quid pro quo. The simple fact that DC can garner bipartisan support for a blow job just goes to show how weak your case is.

What did Obama do? He went with the entire EU in wanting a corrupt prosecutor removed from office? A prosecutor who wasn't even investigating Hunter Biden at the time anyway? Biden's son using his name to get a cushy job? Not illegal and certainly no worse than Jared and Ivanka working IN THE WH, or the entire family not putting Trump Inc into a blind trust. If Trump was so worried about Ukrainian corruption (which magically only showed on his radar AFTER Biden announced he was running) why did he remove the US Ambassador who was recognized as helping Ukraine fight corruption?