Vindmann was offered the position of Defense Minister in Ukraine.

I think he should jump on that opportunity if it's still open.  He obviously has dual loyalties.  Better to have him working for them where we might use his position for our benefit than the way it appears to have been working until today.

Doing what you believe is the right thing is it's own justification even if you probably won't win.


Yet they didn't attack that, they argued procedure. Not saying there is anything wrong with arguing procedure either, just saying you a claiming a mountain of lies yet Trump's defense attorneys didn't think it necessary to address? Trump claimed it all lies and the Trump sheep line up to believe every word from his mouth as if it were gospel. Then his defense team didn't contest the testimony but the blind Trump supporters can't see what daddy Trump told them to believe.

What are his dual loyalties? The president vs the USA?

He was picked for the Trump White House. So is Trump that bad at picking personnel and he just has the misfortune of picking so many people he has to later fire and who end up getting convicted of crimes? At a certain point you can't just blame the whole world for being out to get you.

You keep saying that, but it's not true.

They did attack procedure, but that was a small part of what they presented.

I recommend you watch the entire Trump Team's presentation and take notes. Then tell me they only argued procedure.

But, that requires learning, which you seem to avoid since you already know everything.

You're a sad little troll.

Makes sense.  Trump had his best week since inauguration.

And you are SO triggered!!   

I am beginning to think you are the one who didn't follow the trial. I listened to many many hours of the trial. The majority of the defense argument was procedural, summed up 3 ways.
1. The house didn't hold hearings the way they thought hearings should have been held.
2. This is not a crime therefore does not justify removal
3. Trump can call for an investigation if there was a reason to investigate

You must have only heard 2 hours.

They presented their case over 3 days.  If this is all you got out of it, you should stop trying to participate in political discussions.  We aren't the jackass whispers.

I listened every day of the trial. Steamed it while I was sitting at my desk and listened to it on the car radio driving to work.

Maybe the Trump koolaid manages to prevent you from hearing anything you don't like?

Trump’s defense team, promising a brief summary, repeated their argument that the president sought no “quid pro quo”
for the security aid.

“There is no such evidence,” Trump ever ordered anyone to withhold the money from Ukraine in exchange for the
investigations, Mike Purpura, deputy counsel to the president, said.

Purpura also pointed to Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine, during which the president never mentioned the aid,
and other communications as evidence that indicates Trump blocked the aid to Ukraine because he was concerned
about corruption that had been rampant in the country.

The aid was released without Ukraine ever announcing an investigation, Purpura added.

The House impeachment managers, Purpura argued, “didn’t meet their burden of proof.”

The defense team followed House impeachment managers, who earlier Monday argued that the evidence supports
senators voting to convict Trump and remove him from office.

In your skewed opinion.  The vote wasn't anywhere near the 2/3 they needed to convict.

If "insanity" is doing the same thing over again expecting different results, then what is "doing something for which you already are certain of the outcome, and for which you know you're going to potentially lose the House majority while simultaneously wasting the tax payer's time and money"?

I'd say it falls under TDS -- a malady that's manifested itself in more insane and petulant behavior than under any other in my memory.

If you don't know the difference between the truth and lies of omission, then you need to have someone explain it.

Lies of omission and flat out false logic and conclusions were all the House managers had to go on.

Lies, Damned Lies and Adam Schiff's Moving Lips

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2020/01/27/lies_damned_lies_and_adam_schiffs_moving_lips_142233.html

Yeah.  Procedure.  Nothing about the charges.

Are you drinking again?

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/trump-defense-team-closing-argument-impeachment-an-effort-to-overturn-the-election

Sounds like facts to me, not "procedure."

 

Trump's defense claimed there is no evidence of quid pro quo but that doesn't make it a fact.

I think I have figured out the problem, you conflate facts with things you want to be true. Your blind loyalty to Trump is a bit scary.

There was no quid pro quo with Ukraine, no abuse of power
There is no crime in the President 'obstructing Congress',  it's his job

When is it ever that the burden of evidence falls on the defense to prove?

If there is any reasonable doubt, there must be an acquittal.

In this whole sham there is a whole lot more than just 'reasonable doubt'

It is my understanding that the standards of an impeachment are different and many folks are incorrectly equating their knowledge of criminal and civil court proceedings, the idea that the defense needed to prove innocence is/was absolutely absurd.  I do think there's a lot more to all of this that are currently "behind the scenes" that prevented the defense from hitting back to hard, but just my speculation.

If you guys keep responding to a person with TDS you'd be yelling at a 3d printer all day long and get nothing done.

Efficiency with less letters.

Dik