- Joined
- Aug 3, 2018
- Messages
- 34,752
- Reaction score
- 3,961
- Location
- north carolina
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Democrats presented the Senate with what democrats assumed was an air-tight proven case for a guilty verdict. But was that assumption accurate?
The charges were based upon specific opinions about a specific phone call and specific opinions about the legality of Trump's methods of objecting to the allegations pertaining to that specific phone call. Here are pertinent facts about the case.
1. President Trump's call to President Zelenski in itself was not illegal.
2. President Trump did not actually openly request what his accusers claimed was a quid pro quo demand of Zelensky, but it was assumed by House managers that he secretly demanded investigations into Joe Biden for purely political gain.
3. Several American government employees were listening to the call and it can be assumed Trump was aware of their presence on the line when he made the call.
4. Only one listener became concerned about the call and leaked details about the call to various people who were not on the call listening in with him.
For Trump to be found guilty of obstruction in the call two things needed to be proved: That the phone call was a crime and that his objections to the process of establishing his guilt in the crime being discussed involved specific illegal actions.
What must be proven to interpret the phone call as a crime? Criminal motive and intent. What evidence did democrats present of Trump's criminal motive and intent?
1. Schiff paraphrased the content of the call in a way which left no doubt about the selfish intent by wording which was clear. However, Schiff's rendition of the call was clearly erroneous and pure fabrication, but it did show how democrats interpreted Trump's call according to what they assumed were his secret motives and intentions.
The democrats failed to prove they were correct in their assumptions about Trump's motives and intentions, but they impeached him anyway on a party line vote and sent that result to the Senate and then pressed Senators to keep questioning new witnesses in hopes of finally finding proof that their assumptions of Trump's motives were accurate.
Nobody should criticize US Senators for voting to acquit because democrats failed to prove democrat assumptions about Trump's secret motives.
The charges were based upon specific opinions about a specific phone call and specific opinions about the legality of Trump's methods of objecting to the allegations pertaining to that specific phone call. Here are pertinent facts about the case.
1. President Trump's call to President Zelenski in itself was not illegal.
2. President Trump did not actually openly request what his accusers claimed was a quid pro quo demand of Zelensky, but it was assumed by House managers that he secretly demanded investigations into Joe Biden for purely political gain.
3. Several American government employees were listening to the call and it can be assumed Trump was aware of their presence on the line when he made the call.
4. Only one listener became concerned about the call and leaked details about the call to various people who were not on the call listening in with him.
For Trump to be found guilty of obstruction in the call two things needed to be proved: That the phone call was a crime and that his objections to the process of establishing his guilt in the crime being discussed involved specific illegal actions.
What must be proven to interpret the phone call as a crime? Criminal motive and intent. What evidence did democrats present of Trump's criminal motive and intent?
1. Schiff paraphrased the content of the call in a way which left no doubt about the selfish intent by wording which was clear. However, Schiff's rendition of the call was clearly erroneous and pure fabrication, but it did show how democrats interpreted Trump's call according to what they assumed were his secret motives and intentions.
The democrats failed to prove they were correct in their assumptions about Trump's motives and intentions, but they impeached him anyway on a party line vote and sent that result to the Senate and then pressed Senators to keep questioning new witnesses in hopes of finally finding proof that their assumptions of Trump's motives were accurate.
Nobody should criticize US Senators for voting to acquit because democrats failed to prove democrat assumptions about Trump's secret motives.
Last edited: