Blungold
Thanks for your reply and tone.

Collusion is association not a crime. This seems to have surprised a lot of people but it shouldn't. Meeting with Russians at Trump tower to get dirt on your opponent is collusion. So is hiring a foreign intelligence agent to go to Russia and get dirt on your opponent, Donald Trump- remember that. Neither is criminal. Russians were colluding with Trump so were Israelis and Saudis

I agree that Trump is sleazy, surrounds himself with sleaze and welcomes sleaze but on every thing else we disagree.

It's true that little is to be gained by point by point arguments. But I will say that a lot of the media hysterical pillars of this story have been refuted. Cohen in Prague. Manafort and Assange. Manafort sharing polling data. Papadopoulos and his secret Russian meetings. This is a gang of fools and grifters not kgb conspirators led by possibly the worst candidate for an intelligence operation in history- Donald Trump

In the end zero Americans have been charged with anything to do with Russian interference. Who has been convicted of interference? Nobody. A bunch of Russians were charged but will never see trial. Not even Assange was charged which is shocking since the US government is trying to indict him on a bogus conspiracy hack with Chelsea Manning. Neat little bow around this isn't it- one that means nobody will ever know what happened but "it's just Russiatown, Jake."

Who really benefited by this circus and misinformation? Trump obviously. Let's assume most of the country is not as rabid as we. What did they learn today? Trump didn't conspire with Putin ( hey, that's good); Trump is a sleazeball that probably obstructed justice( well, we knew that). So the Democrats will do nothing because to impeach means the inevitable " no collusion, no obstruction, no impeachment" tweet

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

blungld said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Dems have egg all over their faces and are now really making fools of themselves by continuing to preach the collusion and obstruction narrative.

---

Just to be clear, you think the obstruction is a narrative? As in a made up story? That there were no acts of obstruction and that the report does not list acts of obstruction? And that we should have no issue with any of the president's actions and you endorse those actions entirely? That people who are offended and concerned by Trump's actions and want there to be consequences are instead being foolish with egg on their face?

Is that it, or do you just side with Trump and against Liberals no matter what the facts are or how bad things get?

---

No, I don't just automatically side with Trump. It is now quite clear that Mueller found no evidence of criminal activity. The Dems (especially Adam Schiff) for 2 years have been guaranteeing that Mueller would find many criminal acts by the President. The fact that he did not now has the Dems in full panic mode. Get over it! Trump is not going to be removed from office. It's time for Congress to start dealing with some of the country's problems and challenges.

Yes, the Dems do, indeed, now have egg all over their faces. And they just keep digging themselves into a deeper and deeper hole. They're beyond delusional at this point.

dajo9 said:

---

Golden One said:

---

Calcupcakes said:

---

But I agree with the other posters that the Russia-collusion-cooperation-conspiracy angle is a dead-end and should be put to rest.

---

I agree. All the Dems are doing by continuing to hammer the collusion/obstruction message is to virtually assure Trump's re-election in 2020. They need to start developing policy proposals for the future that aren't just Bernie-style pie-in-the sky socialist garbage.

---

Wait til GoldenOne figures out what calcupcakes thinks of the obstruction issue

---

I could care less what calcupcakes thinks of the obstruction issue. But he is absolutely correct in saying the Russia-collusion-cooperation-conspiracy angle is a dead-end and should be put to rest. Failing to do so will spell death for Dems in 2020.

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

---

Mueller himself says that the report does not exonerate the President on obstruction. He was very specific about that. So no, it does not "conclusively prove" that he's not guilty.

You are the one who is falling for spin and talking points.

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

---

Mueller himself says that the report does not exonerate the President on obstruction. He was very specific about that. So no, it does not "conclusively prove" that he's not guilty.

You are the one who is falling for spin and talking points.

---

Sorry, you're wrong. Mueller said that after 2 years of investigation he could not accumulate sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction. Spin it anyway you want, but it's proven conclusively to me that Trump is not guilty of criminal activity. But go ahead and continue spewing the same garbage as Schumer, Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff, etc. It's turning people off and helping Trump's re-election prospects.

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

---

Mueller himself says that the report does not exonerate the President on obstruction. He was very specific about that. So no, it does not "conclusively prove" that he's not guilty.

You are the one who is falling for spin and talking points.

---

Sorry, you're wrong. Mueller said that after 2 years of investigation he could not accumulate sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction. Spin it anyway you want, but it's proven conclusively to me that Trump is not guilty of criminal activity. But go ahead and continue spewing the same garbage as Schumer, Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff, etc. It's turning people off and helping Trump's re-election prospects.

---

"And apart from OLC's constitutional view, we recognized that a Federal criminal accusation against a sitting President would place burdens on the President's capacity to govern and potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct....we considered whether to evaluate the conduct we investigated under the Justice Manual standards governing prosecution and delineation decisions, but we determined not to apply an approach that could potentially result in a judgment that the President committed crimes....Fairness concerns counseled against potentially reaching that judgment when no charges can be brought.....a prosecutor's judgment that crimes were committed, but that no charges will be brought affords no such adversarial opportunity for public name-clearing before an impartial adjudicator....if we had confidence after a thorough investigation of the facts that the President clearly did not commit obstruction of justice, we would so state. Based on the facts and the applicable legal standards, however, we are unable to reach that judgment."

These are just excerpts obviously. I would highly recommend reading the entire introduction to Vol. 2. It clearly spells out that Mueller

1. believed he could not indict a sitting President
2. and that Mueller could not give an opinion on whether Trump committed a crime because (since there would be no trial), it would be unfair to Trump since he could not mount his own defense
3. thus, the best Mueller could do was lay out the case for obstruction and let congress make a call. as mueller stated, he did not want to indict as it could "potentially preempt constitutional processes for addressing presidential misconduct"

Golden One said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

Golden One said:

---

Calcupcakes said:

---

But I agree with the other posters that the Russia-collusion-cooperation-conspiracy angle is a dead-end and should be put to rest.

---

I agree. All the Dems are doing by continuing to hammer the collusion/obstruction message is to virtually assure Trump's re-election in 2020. They need to start developing policy proposals for the future that aren't just Bernie-style pie-in-the sky socialist garbage.

---

Wait til GoldenOne figures out what calcupcakes thinks of the obstruction issue

---

I could care less what calcupcakes thinks of the obstruction issue. But he is absolutely correct in saying the Russia-collusion-cooperation-conspiracy angle is a dead-end and should be put to rest. Failing to do so will spell death for Dems in 2020.

---

Because all those middle of the road voters are going to decide that Trump telling his staff to do illegal things and them refusing to do them makes him a better president than the other option?

Yeah right.

blungld said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

What nature of crime would have to take place for each party's congress to turn on their own party's President by going ahead with impeachment proceeding?

It would have to virtually be politically unpalatable to NOT proceed because a party will avoid impeachment of its own at all costs -- unless not doing so puts their own seats and reputations in jeopardy

---

You mean like when more noble Republicans turned on Nixon because it was the right thing to do and they cared about law and the country? You are just a rambling defense of horrible things.

---

Those were Northern Republicans. Southern whites won't turn on their President. Southern Whites don't believe in Democracy. Before you reflexively reject this argument - think about Jim Crow and what it means to implement and enforce that in person for a century. Think about gerrymandering and voter suppression today. That is the Republican Party we are dealing with.

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

---

You're going to look awfully stupid when the history of trump is written, when historians tell the tale of this pathetic chapter.
Oh wait, you already do.

I recommend, friend, you don't share your views with your grandchildren. They're gonna see the ugly truth of grandpa's skewed political beliefs, and it won't serve to your credit, or standing within the family as you decline.

Wrong side of history, bub.

"In one scene that McGahn recounted to the Mueller team, Trump takes issue with McGahn's note-taking: "The President then asked, 'What-about these notes? Why do you take notes? Lawyers don't take notes. I never had a lawyer who took notes.'"
"McGahn responded that he keeps notes because he is a 'real lawyer' and explained that notes create a record and are not a bad thing."
"The President said, 'I've had a lot of great lawyers, like Roy Cohn. He did not take notes.'" Axios

There is only one reason for tRump's lawyers not to take notes and that is because if the communication between a client and his attorney is in furtherance of a crime or fraud then under the Crime/Fraud exception the Attorney/Client Privilege will not apply to shield the communication and the lawyer's notes would have to be produced in a legal proceeding. Clearly tRump's attorneys know that due to the nature of the discussions they have with tRump that if they took notes they would not be protected.

So this pos has been trying this case on his msnbc propaganda outlet for two years but the day the report comes out is the day for prosecutorial discretion

"For the Trump presidency, exposed in all its ugliness in the Mueller report, is predicated on a willingness to shred the rules and norms that sustain liberal democracy and it relies for its success on the unwillingness of liberal democracy's guardians to do the same....

...There is a fundamental mismatch here: Trump cutting every corner, trampling on every ethical guideline, while Mueller and those like him primly weigh up the legal niceties and nuances. They are thumbing through the rulebook of the monastery while in front of them a mafia don creates havoc. This is the authoritarian populists' great strength, and not only in the US: they break all the rules, banking on the fact that their opponents will stick to them and be weaker as a result. It is the perennial villain's advantage: they play dirty, knowing you'll play nice. They're doing it again now, claiming exoneration when Mueller pointedly does not exonerate Trump of obstruction and when he has revealed so much that is, as the lawyers have it, "lawful but awful". Jonathan Freedland, The Guardian

bearister said:

---

"For the Trump presidency, exposed in all its ugliness in the Mueller report, is predicated on a willingness to shred the rules and norms that sustain liberal democracy and it relies for its success on the unwillingness of liberal democracy's guardians to do the same....

...There is a fundamental mismatch here: Trump cutting every corner, trampling on every ethical guideline, while Mueller and those like him primly weigh up the legal niceties and nuances. They are thumbing through the rulebook of the monastery while in front of them a mafia don creates havoc. This is the authoritarian populists' great strength, and not only in the US: they break all the rules, banking on the fact that their opponents will stick to them and be weaker as a result. It is the perennial villain's advantage: they play dirty, knowing you'll play nice. They're doing it again now, claiming exoneration when Mueller pointedly does not exonerate Trump of obstruction and when he has revealed so much that is, as the lawyers have it, "lawful but awful". Jonathan Freedland, The Guardian

---

That's why the witch hunt claim is so frustrating. Here is a man who is a total patriot and man of honor (as in one of our greatest) who led every part of his investigation with the highest to-a-fault following of law and order...and yet Trump's supporters accuse Mueller of witch hunt and bias and repeat all kinds of careless words cast in rage-tweeted bursts by an idiot at 2AM, and they believe that THIS is the real American, the man inciting them to their unPatriotic behavior.

It's the scene in the movie where you cry as you watch the innocent good person who stuck to their principles executed while the person who lied and made up the accusations smirks knowing they got away with it. Only in this cinema, half the audience is cheering and is happy to see the other half of the audience crying.

I didn't know that propaganda would work just as well here as everywhere and that there were so many cruel people in our society.

I am now at the point in believing that even if the Mueller report had decided to make a ruling and proclaim obstruction, let alone collusion/coordination/conspiracy, the response would be no different. They would not be calling for impeachment if there was "yes collusion." They would move to collusion doesn't matter. The Deep State led the investigation...etc. Why are we pretending that they actually care what the report says at all?

They choose Trump. That is it. He can do no wrong. He can do whatever he wants. Anyone who opposes him is wrong and an enemy. Attacks on Trump are now an attack on their sense of self and tribe (the irony here is they call out others as snowflakes and practicing identity politics). I think there would be a shockingly high number of Americans emotionally ready to move to violence if the report found him guilty and the Dems moved to impeach. I think it is a huge behind the scenes consideration by Congress and DOJ the threat to national security his supporters present. I think some of the slow roll out we witness is to diffuse their anger and to mitigate the shooting in the streets. That's how far the crazy has gone and the posters on these boards making their "moderate" arguments of defense of Trump are part of the normalization and undergirding of the extremists. Blood will be on their hands if there is an incident/s, but they will never accept responsibility just as they will not stop moving the goalposts and never owning the mess they have created.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/04/mueller-report-special-counsel-investigations/

The above is a call out to conservatives from a conservative of which, I am one. I find Trump to be disgusting and an embarrassing. Looking at him and the Dem candidates, I am so worried about our country.

kelly09 said:

---

The above is a call out to conservatives from a conservative of which, I am one. I find Trump to be disgusting and an embarrassing. Looking at him and the Dem candidates, I am so worried about our country.

---

I don't agree with much of the article, especially "Finally, despite Trump's hatred for the investigation, his White House cooperated with it fully," that is categorically absurd and spelled out in great detail in the report that they did not cooperate...but whatever it takes for you to stop supporting him. Does this mean that the actions detailed in the report have led you to conclude that he should no longer be president? If so, bravo. We need people like you to come around on this.

So it didn't exonerate him?

blungld said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

The above is a call out to conservatives from a conservative of which, I am one. I find Trump to be disgusting and an embarrassing. Looking at him and the Dem candidates, I am so worried about our country.

---

I don't agree with much of the article, especially "Finally, despite Trump's hatred for the investigation, his White House cooperated with it fully," that is categorically absurd and spelled out in great detail in the report that they did not cooperate...but whatever it takes for you to stop supporting him. Does this mean that the actions detailed in the report have led you to conclude that he should no longer be president? If so, bravo. We need people like you to come around on this.

---

Blue, the actions in the report confirmed to me that he should never had been nominated nor elected. But I don't think he'll be removed. But he is capable of doing something going forward to further inflame.I bet he will.

Yogi Bear said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

---

Mueller himself says that the report does not exonerate the President on obstruction. He was very specific about that. So no, it does not "conclusively prove" that he's not guilty.

You are the one who is falling for spin and talking points.

---

Sorry, you're wrong. Mueller said that after 2 years of investigation he could not accumulate sufficient evidence to charge the President with obstruction. Spin it anyway you want, but it's proven conclusively to me that Trump is not guilty of criminal activity. But go ahead and continue spewing the same garbage as Schumer, Pelosi, Nadler, Schiff, etc. It's turning people off and helping Trump's re-election prospects.

---

No it's not. It's just fake assuring the people who were always going to vote for him that they were right to vote for him. You have no idea of what the non-Trump supporters think.

---

Neither do you, amigo. You suffer from a serious case of Trump Derangement Syndrome, and it's terribly clouding your judgement.

kelly09 said:

---

blungld said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

The above is a call out to conservatives from a conservative of which, I am one. I find Trump to be disgusting and an embarrassing. Looking at him and the Dem candidates, I am so worried about our country.

---

I don't agree with much of the article, especially "Finally, despite Trump's hatred for the investigation, his White House cooperated with it fully," that is categorically absurd and spelled out in great detail in the report that they did not cooperate...but whatever it takes for you to stop supporting him. Does this mean that the actions detailed in the report have led you to conclude that he should no longer be president? If so, bravo. We need people like you to come around on this.

---

Blue, the actions in the report confirmed to me that he should never had been nominated nor elected. But I don't think he'll be removed. But he is capable of doing something going forward to further inflame.I bet he will.

---

Yea, Trump is not getting removed, and the Dem's would be better off spending their time with a primary focus on good governance (a novel idea for both sides) and positioning themselves for the 2020 election. I wouldn't completely move on from Russia, but just touch upon it every now and again to not let it be completely forgotten(and mention it more within the context of Trump's other corruption (by his cabinet) & conflicts of interests).

kelly09 said:

---

Blue, the actions in the report confirmed to me that he should never had been nominated nor elected. But I don't think he'll be removed. But he is capable of doing something going forward to further inflame.I bet he will.

---

You can count on it. Trump can't help himself.

golden sloth said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

blungld said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

The above is a call out to conservatives from a conservative of which, I am one. I find Trump to be disgusting and an embarrassing. Looking at him and the Dem candidates, I am so worried about our country.

---

I don't agree with much of the article, especially "Finally, despite Trump's hatred for the investigation, his White House cooperated with it fully," that is categorically absurd and spelled out in great detail in the report that they did not cooperate...but whatever it takes for you to stop supporting him. Does this mean that the actions detailed in the report have led you to conclude that he should no longer be president? If so, bravo. We need people like you to come around on this.

---

Blue, the actions in the report confirmed to me that he should never had been nominated nor elected. But I don't think he'll be removed. But he is capable of doing something going forward to further inflame.I bet he will.

---

Yea, Trump is not getting removed, and the Dem's would be better off spending their time with a primary focus on good governance (a novel idea for both sides) and positioning themselves for the 2020 election. I wouldn't completely move on from Russia, but just touch upon it every now and again to not let it be completely forgotten(and mention it more within the context of Trump's other corruption (by his cabinet) & conflicts of interests).

---

You're exactly right. But I don't think the far left of the party has enough common sense to realize the veracity of your view.
t

kelly09 said:

---

Blue, the actions in the report confirmed to me that he should never had been nominated nor elected. But I don't think he'll be removed. But he is capable of doing something going forward to further inflame.I bet he will.

---

So what do you think should happen now?

I don't like the thought of impeachment being political (though of course it is). That cuts both ways. I don't think the House should NOT impeach because of a political calculation on Senate voting no or the effect on the election. And I don't think they should vote to impeach to score points.

My feeling is that the evidence in the report requires the House to move forward with impeachment right now. To NOT make any political calculation and just do their job of oversight. There is clear evidence of impeachable offenses and so they should investigate and vote. If he is never actually impeached, so be it. If it results in a censure, so be it. If it costs the Dems the House, so be it. Just move forward with the job you are sworn and elected to do.

If the House doesn't move forward with impeachment after a foreign country attacks our election with the effort to put this president in place, then we adopt friendly Russian policy, that president is in negotiation with real estate deals in that country, and there is ample evidence of connectivity (call it collusion, call it cooperation, call it a wink, call it willful ignorance, call it whatever) and engages in actions to hide those connections and have them not investigated, while also refusing to testify himself or divulge a financial accounting...if you don't investigate this, what do you investigate? What we have already seen is far worse than a BJ or a break in.

I would be demanding the same thing of any Congress and of any president. We all can see that this is not normal and SOMETHING corrupt has and is occurring. Let's have an impeachment hearing and see what is learned and let's have the witnesses and president speak to the American public under oath and either eliminate this cloud or reveal the crimes. Let's get this over with and find out the truth.

concordtom said:

---

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

Golden One said:

---

The Mueller report, which they were anxiously waiting for during the past 2 years, is now public and conclusively concludes no criminal activity was undertaken by the President.

---

It definitely does not.

---

Wrong. You're falling for the failing Dem talking points that more and more people are rejecting .

---

You're going to look awfully stupid when the history of trump is written, when historians tell the tale of this pathetic chapter.
Oh wait, you already do.

I recommend, friend, you don't share your views with your grandchildren. They're gonna see the ugly truth of grandpa's skewed political beliefs, and it won't serve to your credit, or standing within the family as you decline.

Wrong side of history, bub.

---

Bub, you have a one track mind that is seriously contaminated with Trump Derangement Syndrome. You hate Trump. I get it. Try moving on to some other topic and forget about Trump for awhile. It's a beautiful day outside, and life is wonderful. Enjoy it before it's too late. History will take care of itself and won't give a damn about what you or I think.

sycasey said:

---

So according to you:

"Not sufficient evidence" = "Conclusively proven"

No wonder you have failed to understand what the report says.

---

LOL! You get more hilarious with every post.

Golden One said:

---

sycasey said:

---

So according to you:

"Not sufficient evidence" = "Conclusively proven"

No wonder you have failed to understand what the report says.

---

LOL! You get more hilarious with every post.

---

Thank you.

blungld said:

---

So what do you think should happen now?

I don't like the thought of impeachment being political (though of course it is). That cuts both ways. I don't think the House should NOT impeach because of a political calculation on Senate voting no or the effect on the election. And I don't think they should vote to impeach to score points.

.... Let's get this over with and find out the truth.

---

I understand your frustration. But we already know the truth from the report. No need for a hearing to get Trump to lie again.

The question is, will the Dems commence impeachment proceedings based on the evidence already developed and presented to them on a platter by Mueller? And unfortunately, it's going to be a political calculation.

Pre-report polling suggests that the public doesn't favor it. Post-report polling will likely increase the anti-impeachment figure. Nancy Pelosi, if she's doing her job, won't call for impeachment with these numbers.

If the numbers suggested otherwise -- that Trump's approval would dip to the low 30s -- then it would not be "worth it" to impeach him, since that would mean certain victory in 19 months.

oy vey.

Trump always gets his way. There are never any consequences for wrongdoing. And Democrats will let him get his way.

They aren't going to impeach anyone they can beat.

Calcupcakes said:

---

blungld said:

---

So what do you think should happen now?

I don't like the thought of impeachment being political (though of course it is). That cuts both ways. I don't think the House should NOT impeach because of a political calculation on Senate voting no or the effect on the election. And I don't think they should vote to impeach to score points.

.... Let's get this over with and find out the truth.

---

I understand your frustration. But we already know the truth from the report. No need for a hearing to get Trump to lie again.

The question is, will the Dems commence impeachment proceedings based on the evidence already developed and presented to them on a platter by Mueller? And unfortunately, it's going to be a political calculation.

Pre-report polling suggests that the public doesn't favor it. Post-report polling will likely increase the anti-impeachment figure. Nancy Pelosi, if she's doing her job, won't call for impeachment with these numbers.

If the numbers suggested otherwise -- that Trump's approval would dip to the low 30s -- then it would not be "worth it" to impeach him, since that would mean certain victory in 19 months.

oy vey.

---

Hard to argue with that, but I guess I want Dems to take an ethical stand on what Congress stands for and what future presidents should face and not care if they lose the House or take a huge hit.

I do think there is a HUGE value in hearing the lies or retractions on camera under oath. We deserve our president and those named in report to have to address "us" directly.

blungld said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

Blue, the actions in the report confirmed to me that he should never had been nominated nor elected. But I don't think he'll be removed. But he is capable of doing something going forward to further inflame.I bet he will.

---

So what do you think should happen now?

I don't like the thought of impeachment being political (though of course it is). That cuts both ways. I don't think the House should NOT impeach because of a political calculation on Senate voting no or the effect on the election. And I don't think they should vote to impeach to score points.

My feeling is that the evidence in the report requires the House to move forward with impeachment right now. To NOT make any political calculation and just do their job of oversight. There is clear evidence of impeachable offenses and so they should investigate and vote. If he is never actually impeached, so be it. If it results in a censure, so be it. If it costs the Dems the House, so be it. Just move forward with the job you are sworn and elected to do.

If the House doesn't move forward with impeachment after a foreign country attacks our election with the effort to put this president in place, then we adopt friendly Russian policy, that president is in negotiation with real estate deals in that country, and there is ample evidence of connectivity (call it collusion, call it cooperation, call it a wink, call it willful ignorance, call it whatever) and engages in actions to hide those connections and have them not investigated, while also refusing to testify himself or divulge a financial accounting...if you don't investigate this, what do you investigate? What we have already seen is far worse than a BJ or a break in.

I would be demanding the same thing of any Congress and of any president. We all can see that this is not normal and SOMETHING corrupt has and is occurring. Let's have an impeachment hearing and see what is learned and let's have the witnesses and president speak to the American public under oath and either eliminate this cloud or reveal the crimes. Let's get this over with and find out the truth.

---

I agree with this. At some point Congress has to defend the Constitution against Executive lawlessness. This is that point.