One count of obstruction of an official proceeding, five counts of false statements – including lying to Congress – and one count of witness tampering. And you want to paint Roger Stone as the victim and his prosecution as unjust? That's ridiculous. He broke the law and deserves to be help accountable and punished accordingly.

A blatant fishing expedition. A man will face years in prison because he made mistakes during the process of an investigation of which there is no underlying crime.

Lying, obstruction, and witness tampering aren’t just mistakes. They’re crimes.

A man will face years in prison because he made mistakes during the process of an investigation of which there is no underlying crime. — NOS4A2

What tyranny that a man cannot lie under oath and tamper witnesses.

Where's the justice?

Is the justice state dead?

How can it be, that people are put to court or impeached because of lying?

Clinton was acquitted. More evidence of a two-tiered justice system.

he made mistakes during the process of an investigation of which there is no underlying crime. — NOS4A2

"No underlying crime" parrots Trump's "totally exonerated." So we have an alt-fact parrot here.

Clinton was acquitted. More evidence of a two-tiered justice system. — NOS4A2

Evidence?

Well, let's see how the impeachment of agent Trumpov goes...

And of course, lying about a blowjob and lying about getting support from Russian intelligence services is naturally the same thing... :smirk:

We know what the Mueller was investigating and why crossfire hurricane was spying on American citizens—Russian attempts to influence the election and any Coordination between the Trump campaign. No need to lie.

Lying to Congress. One minute it’s “case closed” the next it’s “oh but it was about a blowjob”.

Trump asked the Russians to help him. It was on TV.

Repeating the Clinton line. Alt-facts.

I saw it on TV. I saw Trump ask the Russians for help.

Alt-facts. — NOS4A2

I know you are but what am I?

Lying to Congress. — NOS4A2

Which in my view is then OK to have an impeachment hearing. Being actually impeached or resigning as Nixon did is another matter. Then the Republicans had enough of Watergate. Today likely the whole thing wouldn't even come up.

Yet the story with Trump is quite obvious. Everything you read just basically paints the same picture of this guy.

Which in my view is then OK to have an impeachment hearing. Being actually impeached or resigning as Nixon did is another matter. Then the Republicans had enough of Watergate. Today likely the whole thing wouldn't even come up.

Yet the story with Trump is quite obvious. Everything you read just basically paints the same picture of this guy.

Impeachment is supposed to be used in the rare occasion that high crimes and misdemeanors are committed. So what is the crime?

Impeachment is supposed to be used in the rare occasion that high crimes and misdemeanors are committed. So what is the crime? — NOS4A2

And misdemeanours.

So, it's a witch-hunt if Trump says it's a witch-hunt, and it's alt-facts if he says it too.

So, the man must really be the second coming of Christ or something.

And misdemeanours.

What is the misdemeanor?

Attempted extortion. Mulvaney says they do it all the time.

(I heard him say it. It was on TV.)

Are you wearing a T-shirt that says "read the transcripts"?

Repeating the Clinton line. Alt-facts. — NOS4A2

Oooh, seems you a have a new take on this! Umm...pizzagate.

Earlier Trump said it was sarcasm.

So what is the crime? — NOS4A2

Right, willingly taking help from a foreign adversarial intelligence service and then pressuring other countries to dig up dirt at your opponent. Or to say it with legal terms, us the office to solicit a foreign country, to interfere in the 2020 US election campaign.

And I'd think you could enlarge this with checking Trump's and his son-in-laws dealings with the Saudi's, because the absolute confusion in US policy in the Middle East with suddenly White House taking a very Pro-Saudi view totally opposite to the US foreign policy before (and the secretary of state learning this only later) hints simply at corruption.

Anyway, the US foreign policy is in total disarray.

The fact that Zelensky knows how to tell lies...what follows from that fact?

Right, willingly taking help from a foreign adversarial intelligence service and then pressuring other countries to dig up dirt at your opponent. Or to say it with legal terms, us the office to solicit a foreign country, to interfere in the 2020 US election campaign.

All of that is a complete fabrication with zero evidence. Pizzagate indeed.

Now the president of Ukraine is lying...

Shocking? I take it you don't have a lot of history under your belt.

New opening statement.

Holmes' statement confirmed the testimony from Bill Taylor, the top US diplomat in Ukraine, who revealed the July 26 phone call with lawmakers at his public testimony Wednesday, saying Holmes had informed Taylor about it after he first appeared on Capitol Hill behind closed doors last month. Holmes' testimony places Trump closer to the push for Ukraine to open an investigation into his political rival, and raises additional questions about the testimony of Sondland, who is scheduled to testify publicly next week.

"Sondland told Trump that Zelensky 'loves your ass,' " Holmes said, according to a copy of his opening statement. "I then heard President Trump ask, 'So, he's gonna do the investigation?' Ambassador Sondland replied that 'he's gonna do it,' adding that President Zelensky will do 'anything you ask him to.'"

...

Holmes also confirmed Taylor's testimony about the President's thoughts on Ukraine, saying he had asked Sondland "if it was true that the President did not 'give a s--- about Ukraine."
Holmes said Sondland had responded that Trump cares only about "big stuff." When Holmes said that the Ukraine war was big, Sondland responded, " 'Big stuff' that benefits the President, like the Biden investigation that Mr. Giuliani was pushing," Holmes said.

Now the president of Ukraine is lying... — NOS4A2

Of course, your standards are just beyond comprehension here.

All of that is a complete fabrication with zero evidence. — NOS4A2

It is strangely a totally blind spot for some Americans.

Similar behavior I witnessed on the old PF site with some Americans having the urge to defend George Bush and the War in Iraq: that Saddam had ties with Al Qaeda, the threat of WMD's was evident. Then the intelligence services lied to him or he couldn't have known there weren't any WMD's around anymore. The quite open and very well documented active pushing for the war in Iraq by the vice-President were simply ignored as Trump's ties to Russia and actions today. Nope, it seemed to be a calling for them to back their prez and defend him on a philosophy forum.

And this case?

I myself noticed something was strange when Trump came out with his Foreign Policy team in March 2016 (if I remember correctly) and some guys bewildered the Washington circles...guys which later then came around in the investigations. So I've myself been actively following the issue from early 2016.

Have to say Trump is as open as can be. How everything looks typically is like it is.

What is with American jingoism? And, over what?

Is this guy beyond reproach?