Trump impeachment - your questions answered

SPC (Join to see) - No they didn't. This is vote number four on trying to impeach.
As to the charge, it is impeachable because the House says it is.
And Trump will be acquitted, because the Senate will say so.
And at the end of the day, we all just went nowhere... all to make some kind of rhetorical point.

We can debate the merits and demerits of the case all day, but that will be the outcome.
The Democrats might want to consider actually trying to find a platform people can get behind besides "Trump bad" or they will be in the wilderness for another term.
Multi-trillion dollar social projects do not seem to be capturing America's enthusiasm.
But getting to work and earning more does.

1SG (Join to see) - if one or two Congress critters do something, it doesn't really count to paint the entire group with the event.

Capt Gregory Prickett - What you talkin' about?

SSG Matthew Adkins - I recognize that the "party" was very interested in impeaching the President from an early date, a view that was accepted as dogma in short order. Hence such behaviors as encouraging faithless electors and boycotting Inauguration Day. For example, I think reasonable people knew that the whole collusion narrative was bullshit from the get-go, but were just fine with throwing accusations about without evidence (see Adam Schiff) for years in the hopes that Mueller would find some kind of incriminating evidence of this or some other activity with Trump or associates. This was somewhat successful, but did not succeed in securing the ultimate scalp of Trump himself. They were despondent when this was unsuccessful in showing that Trump was a Manchurian Candidate in league with the enemy (which speaks volumes). But some tried anyway, and THAT was the effort(s) that failed.
I don't think "impeachment" is the official platform of the party, but we all know damned well that they planned it for some time and never would have gone through with it if they hadn't counted noses and deemed it would be successful. Nancy isn't going to do this and have it fail on the floor.
As for the Congressmembers who made comments that were off-message, I also think that they were talked to in private, but only insofar as giving guidance on what is ok to say in public. It is readily apparent that talking points are circulated and members are expected not to stray from them (both parties do this). I'm also quite sure that assurances were given in private that things would be moving along.

You could tell when Nancy made her announcement that she was all cued up to go after Trump for ignoring the subpoena for the call transcript, but she "forgot her notes on the plane" (LOL NOPE) when he released them publicly.

Campaigns may not solicit or accept contributions from foreign nationals. Federal law prohibits contributions, donations, expenditures and disbursements solicited, directed, received or made directly or indirectly by or from foreign nationals in connection with any election — federal, state or local. The crux of it is whether you believe that the President was actually concerned about corruption or about investigating the Bidens.

OK, let's start at the beginning. Campaign finance felonies. Obstruction of justice. Bribery. Extortion. Witness tampering. Do you want me to go on?

Try.reading the two counts of the impeachment, they are very clear.