[Cardfan1]

First, both side do not spew vitriol. And if you really do remember the Clinton impeachment you know Republicans just recently began to defend themselves against the verbal onslaught.

The bolded--- Yeah maybe. There is of course is a major problem with your logic. There was never any evidence upon which to base even one of the 4 year long series of ever morphing charges in the first place. Innocent until proven guilty, where have I heard that? It was clear evidence that Adam Schiff, who never ever fibs, had in his possession, remember? And yet the investigation in search of a crime rages on.

Again. The President has the authority to withhold aid and Americans could use a little wisdom in these matters if you ask me. As things stand we taxpayers have directly funded quite enough terrorism for example.

But those poor Ukrainians over there, just too stupid to know how shamefully they've been played.

Nah, I'm pretty sure it's both sides. Republicans are just now defending themselves? Come on, man! You can't actually believe that.

Like I said earlier there is circumstantial evidence that warrants an investigation. Personally, I would like to see it through with the fact witnesses, but this isn't a criminal court and democrats are playing hardball politics. We got what we got. Barring a trial he won't be removed on the evidence presented at this point.

The president can withhold aid, and IMO should withhold a lot more. Ukraine wasn't one of those times.