DC Tom

Yes, Trump was using the royal "we," because he's a monarchist. Just like he was using the royal "our country." Again...preconceived notions. Which are not evidentiary. (Yes, I know you know. I'm telling Tibs.)

By demonstrating that you intentionally misquoted the evidence to support your preconceived notion.

No, I'm arguing that you misrepresented the evidence, and when properly represented the evidence doesn't support impeachment.

"I would like you to do us a favor though because our country has been through a lot..." What Trump actually said. "Us" and "our country" are the antithesis of asking for a personal favor.

A Pelosi press conference, for example.

I KNEW it!

"Awarded" or "punished with?"

Make up your ***** mind.

Just tell him you worked at it. Show some pride in your accomplishments.

No, it actually isn't. The modern university system was built on military cooperation, so it's entirely accurate to call them a pillar of the nation on par with the military. Probably not what he meant, though.

Didn't say he should be. I said the Democrats have to believe he is - because if he's not, he has no motive to target him, and Democrats lose their justification for impeachment.

We've got Mr. Creosote impeaching a reality TV star. How the ***** is this not the Colbert Show?

CNN, the Washintgon Post, the NYT, the LA Times, MSNBC, NBC, CBS, ABC, Politico, The Hill, USA Today, NPR, Vox, The Atlantic, and Bloomberg are all calling them "witnesses." Who's gaslighting whom?

Karlan has to be the easiest A at Stanford. I know the type. All you have to do is parrot back whatever she says, and praise her occasionally. I'll bet in at least on of her classes, the final grade will be based on submitting an "analysis" of her testimony yesterday - which "analysis" will be nothing more than parroting back her statements to prove you watched her.

This is the stupidest line of criticism. She was an blockheaded, trying to create a viral moment with a tendentious metaphor using a strained pun that only proved again that the left can't meme. That people are even making an issue out of this is thoroughly moronic.

More to the point, their only appeals were appeals to emotion. I'd actually agree with the few objective statements they made...if their presumption of guilt were proven. The problem being, again, that the only proof of guilt is even more presumption. All of the testimony supporting impeachment is nothing more than people stating their opinions of Trump.

I'm routinely thankful I chose not to go to Harvard.

Not to testify that hearsay is fact.

There hasn't yet been a witness that's related any facts. Just personal opinions. That's the entire problem. Of all four "witnesses" called yesterday, not one had any direct knowledge of events. Everything they knew was from other people's reports. You know what that makes them? "Not witnesses." Their testimony was at best equivalent to an amicus brief, which is meaningless in the absence of a demonstrated crime.

Turley made my point very clearly.

Trump supporters believe the latter. Sane people who are paying attention know it's the former.

IF PROVEN. You'll notice that, ever since this farce started, I've been very consistent on that very point: make the distinction between a valid foreign policy request and a personal request in this case. You can't. You, specifically, can't, because you're a moron. But nothing in these hearing has made that distinction, either.

Are they even the least bit conscious of the precedent they're setting?

Nothing happened. It was all magic and special effects. The World Trade Center is still there. WAKE UP SHEEPLE!!!!!

They have to believe that. If they don't, their impeachment case falls apart.