Collusion. Quid pro quo. Bribery. I thought we were up to extortion by now.
It's pretty much all three. Is that really all you've got? An argument that the Democrats have to correctly identify the exact accusation that will be proved before they investigate that accusation, and if they investigate only to find out that a different but similar accusation is proved, they have to go sit on a tack?
:lamo
And tell me you don't actually believe that the way investigations into corrupt or criminal activity have got to guess the exact charge that will be proved
before they complete the investigation. If things worked that way few people would go to jail. It'd be literally as stupid as....
...."Gee, we were investigating whether Bob murdered Joe. But it turned out that Joe attacked Bob with fists and Joe shot him without necessarily having to, so we'd want to charge manslaughter. But we told ourselves we were investigating murder, so, Joe is innocent and it's all a witch hunt. Naughty us police!"
Bear in mind, we have to get through the whole federal code.
Well, that's a retarded lie. If the founders intended impeachment to only be over things in the federal code, they'd have said so. At the time of the founding "high crimes and misdemeanors" meant
corrupt acts in the attaining or exercise of office.
And, see, the founders aren't as stupid as you think they were or as stupid as you think everyone else is. They knew that when they did not give any right of appeal to SCOTUS, for example, to a president convicted on articles of impeachment, the practical effect - the effect on reality as it is - was that a president could be impeached and removed for ANYTHING. For example, if the GOP had 70% in the house and 70% of the senate, they could have successfully removed him on the basis of wearing mom jeans.
And he would be removed.
And not being as stupid as you need them and everyone else to be, the founders actually landed on the right note: impeachment is a purely political process, and if voters don't like impeachment, there is a political remedy. Namely, vote out the impeachers.
See? Simple.
Stop these stupid goal-post shifting lies, all of you. You know you're being dishonest so just stop. If you want to say that freezing aid, having admin staff communicate explicitly to Ukraine that Biden/Bursima investigation must be renewed or else not even a meeting, that Trump demanding that very same favor from Zelensky during a call is A-OK, then make that argument.
Make the argument about why it's OK to use official stuff like that to get a personal political favor, one having nothing to do with the country's business. Make it. Don't hide behind these cowardly, stupid, and bitingly dishonest games.
Or destroy Democracy so that you can tell yourself you owned a lib.
:shrug:
