[TheRealThing]

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.

I can only accept the reality my eyes have seen and my ears have heard. Both sides don't do it. That among other things was why I baled out of the Democrat Party in the first place. Along with the fact that I hate being lied to. Bill Clinton's antics taught the whole party what not to do in the Oval Office and how to lie on a professional level. Not saying he was a bad President, and certainly not saying Republicans didn't rue the day they impeached him. In Lead Impeachment Manager Henry Hyde's letter to the Senate, Bill Clinton is clearly charged with the crime of perjury. He was found guilty and fined by a federal judge. And disbarred later for same. Nothing like that has happened involving DJT. And no Senate trial will convict him without meaningful evidence of factual wrongdoing.

MR Hyde felt compelled to impeach the President on grounds of perjury. Not to in any way punish Ol Bill for bad sexual behavior. Now, that's not to say that the Democrats of the day didn't repeat the "it was just sex" narrative 20 billion times to make it seem that way. And certainly they managed to somehow get the subject of slavery and racism on center stage too. But I can tell you that the Republicans did a lousy job of justifying the whole affair. And they lost the argument to Dems who 'crafted' the more clever narrative. Republicans had the high ground, but failed miserably to get the message out.

But even circumstantial evidence has to be verifiable. (id est blue dress) Nothing being said by the Dems has been supported by evidence, and that is why you nor anyone else can name a crime. Donald J Trump has a spotty past, no doubt. But the likelihood that any of MR Trump's Democrat/liberal/deepstate/RINO detractors are worthy to cast the first stone, is highly improbable. All Dems have shown so far are opinion and contempt and guile. But hey, it certainly worked before.

It is odd though. Bill Clinton's sexual exploits didn't bother the left at all. The sexual affairs of DJT's past on the other hand, defy the English language's ability of aptly bash him with.