And the ongoing Durham investigation.

Have at it...

Carol's views on impeachment compel me to respond.  This impeachment is justified because the president used the power of his office to attempt to get the Ukraine government to investigate Trump's political rival.  In other words, to assist Trump in preparing for the 2020 election.  Had Trump asked the Ukraine president to pay Trump $50 million personally in order for Ukraine to get American military assistance, even Republicans would admit that was an impeachable offense. Yet what Trump did was worse--he delayed and threatened to hold back military assistance to a nation in a hot war with Russia, to gain a personal political advantage in our upcoming election. In doing so he already distorted our 2020 electoral process--weakening Biden's position by creating distrust for "the Bidens" even though no evidence of any mis-deeds exist.  In the words Trump often uses---he tried--and has succeeded--in rigging the next election.

God bless the whistleblower---who someday will receive high honors from a future administration. It was only because of the whistleblower's courageous action that Trump was forced to release the summary of the "perfect" telephone call.  

If Trump had done nothing wrong he would have allowed his staff and cabinet officials to testify and produce documents. Lawyers know that a party who stonewalls under these circumstances  (to a much greater degree than did Nixon) is hiding something.

Even if the impeachment is doomed in the Senate, it is important to set out on the record the self-serving abuse of power Trump has committed.  History demands this course of action. And even this president--who lacks critical thinking ability--may ultimately understand that he is not above the law.

Glad I compelled you Alan...Nice to hear from you.

Alan, I've read your post several times.  I feel you present a lot of assumptions and I'd love some clarification...

When did President Trump threaten to hold back military assistance?  I didn't hear a threat in the transcript and, what's more, Zelensky stated he didn't feel threatened or even pressured.

Guess I entirely missed the fact that Trump didn't allow his staff or cabinet members to testify.  Seeing as how I'm not a lawyer, I can think of many reasons a person may not want to testify other than that they have something to hide..  National security would be at the top of that list.  Then there's the fact that these people have a country that needs their attention.

I see a lot of evidence of the Bidens' mis-deeds; certainly more than I see for Trump.  I guess as Stewart's often mentioned, we all see what we want to see. 

I don't know how the whistleblower (his position doesn't even qualify as whistleblower status) could receive high honors seeing as how we don't know who he is.  Heck, we don't even know if he exists.  Guess we could erect a statue for "the unknown whistleblower." ;)   He didn't testify either, so according to the lawyer creed,  he and/or Schiff must have something to hide.

History demands this course of action.  Really? 

Seeing as how my views on impeachment compelled you to write, by all means please tell me where I'm mislead. 

On the Russia investigation...

The Justice Department's inspector general, Michael Horowitz, reported that the alleged criminal conspiracy was nonsense:  no illegal wiretapping, no informants inserted into the campaign (no 'spying'), hence the investigation was opened and conducted under the rules with "...no evidence that political bias or improper motivation influenced the decision" to start it or how to run it.

U.S. Attorney General William Barr said he saw "gross abuses" in the process of obtaining the surveillance warrant and "inexplicable behavior that is intolerable." 

I guess that it is true that "beauty--and ugliness-- is in the eye of the beholder".

Wondering if you watched the Inspector General in the Judicial Committee hearing today?  He made it very clear that the 17 points in his report definitely involved wrongdoing, didn't vindicate anybody who touched it and better not happen again.  In reading the report, that is made very clear.  Considering that Durham continues his criminal investigation (with less restrictions than the IG), guess time will tell.  You know, I realize we're not on the same side of the fence, but I just can't understand how any American wouldn't be troubled by what went on here.  This kind of lying and spying is frightening for our country. 

By the way, I've been chastised often for watching Fox as one of my sources for news.  But at least I was able to see Lindsay Graham's opening statement at the Judiciary Hearing on the IG Report.  CNN and MSNBC didn't air it.  You might not like or agree with him any more than I do Schiff and Nadler, but I like to make choices based on the whole picture.

Lindsey Graham was on both CNN and MSNBC; he's the Senate Judiciary Chair.

AG Barr and President Trump talk about spying.  IG Horowitz's investigation found no evidence of spying.

President Trump calls FBI agents "scum",

he calls Republicans who are not voting for him "human scum".

Trump has no shame; he badmouths our former presidents;

he smelled weakness and captured the Republican Party.

The most important responsibility a president has is to unify our country --

Trump stokes hate and division.

Is there any wonder he is failing miserably?

Maybe you should Google if CNN aired the speech, Janis.  Now I don't know if they aired it later, but they did not air it live.  They stopped it and went to a report about airplaines, then went back.  I believe I was wrong about MSNBC.

Horwitz' report did not say there wasn't spying, but that he couldn't confirm.  His investigation could only include interviews with current officials.  He specifically said no one involved is vindicated.  That restriction is not placed on Barr and Durham, so we'll see what their open investigation has uncovered.

"Hear now this, O foolish people, and without understanding, which have eyes, and see not, which have ears, and hear not."...Jeremiah 5:21

Translation:  "There are none so blind as those who will not see."...John Heywood (1546)

Alan, I have been meaning to respond to your post of 12/11 for a couple of days now, just to say that I agree with virtually everything you posted, however, I am pretty sure that you will now agree that, we see what we want to see.  I am thinking of cutting back on my posting, because of that, as the thing I hate to do most is waste my breath.  And, as much as I have stated that I agree with virtually everything you said, I hope you will agree that the chances of changing Carol's mind about ANY political issue, is a losing proposition - a fool's errand.  But, I could be wrong!  Thanks for your input & you weren't wasting your breath, to me.  But, I see what I want to see.

I find these 'conversations' to be much more pleasant if we don't try to change annyone's political mind.  I try not to do that (or to try to convert anyone's religion), just learn about how and why they think (or believe) the way they do, and let them know the basis of my understanding and belief.  That way we can (maybe) learn from each other and stay friends.   :-)

Amen Brother Ron, Amen!  :-)  Somehow my name stills seem to come up disparagingly.  At least it's not in the form of outright attacks.

After years of being inundated with posts by several classmates on the far left, I had fun having the opportunity on this forum to state some of my viewpoints (thanks for asking), and now Stewart suddenly thinks it's a waste of breath because he can't turn me.  That's BS in my book, so I think I'll stick to the pleasantries of the MF.

Thank you for your continuous respect.

MF???

You realize that has multiple meanings...

Oh, and I like your 'progressive' color photo.  :-)

LOL...I didn't give thought to its other meaning.  But being the genteel lady I am I was, of course, referring to the Message Forum.

Yes, I worked very hard at figuring out how to post a new pic.  I'll be darned (or damned according to Stewart) if I was going to be stuck with the regressives.