@sassyllamaeswuire, i'm afraid an impeachment is absolutely possible based off a witch hunt. An impeachment, like what happened last night, only needs support of 51% of the House. No judge, no voter support, no proof, no evidence, no Senate approval, no journey, not even a trial. It only requires a simple vote of a Democratic majority House of Representatives.
.
In fact your line of thinking that the accusations are so serious that he must be guilty is the foundational reason that the the House Majority Leader chose to go ahead with impeachment knowing full well it'll die in the Senate.
.
Their only goal in this is to make Trump look bad in hopes that fewer people vote for him in November.
.
If that's the case, now who's using their elected power to influence elections.....

@scatmandingo, the problem with Trump people testifying in a hostile congress under oath is in line with the saying "show me the man and I'll show you the crime"
.
Every criminal charge that came out of the Muller probe was a process crime (basically being caught lying or misspeaking under oath).
.
If Trump or his people were to agree to let well trained lawyers tear into them under oath, there would certainly be a handful of process crime charges there as well. Trump knows this and they chose to simply stay away. I don't blame him one bit for recommending that his people stay away.

Oops, my bad Guest.

The senate can actually vote to dismiss the impeachment before it ever goes to trial. That's actually the likely scenario in this case.

I disagree. It's all about the details. Propaganda is garbage. This thing has everything to do with power, Trump has it, and they want it back. Taking away an elected official because the DNC thinks they should have won undermines the entire system. It has to come down to details. Innocent until proven guilty. Guilty has to be proven by facts (details), not determined according to who can whip up public opinion the best (thats what elections are for, not impeachments).

Congressmen, speakers, media people and, by default, normal people keep throwing around the idea that there are the indisputable condemning facts regarding abuse of power and obstructing congress.
.
Although there is a media frenzy, passion, and hatred everywhere, there is no hard evidence (facts) that Trump has done those things. People hate him so much, and the accusations are so great that people are simply assuming he's guilty.
.
To famousone's point, impeachment because of anger and hatred is horrifically wrong.
.
The entirety of the FBI and the US congress cannot bring one oz of proof of guilt. Can anyone on this website offer anything?

@sassyllamaeswuire, i hadn't seen the Trump Foundation story, but I did just read up on it. I'm in 100% agreement that charitable organizations should never be crossed with politics and business. The Trump foundation was very wrong in doing what it did.
.
I did find a couple important details:
1) There was no guilty verdict, the case was settled (thats a significant difference).
2) the Trump Foundation officers (Donald's kids) were ordered to take classes on charitable organizations money management, they are certainly not banned from running charities.
3) although i wish it were not the case, charitable organizations are the both the norm and the primary vehicle used by politicians to increase their lifestyles via their political influence. If you want to know what I mean, research the Clinton Foundation and Clinton Initiative charities drop in "donation" level after she lost the 2016 election.

I'm unaware of that. Do you happen to have a link handy?

I assume he means the Democratic Part authority.
.
I would call President Trump bombastic, egotistical, a bully, thick headed, and narrow minded, amongst others. But is there any real evidence that he's corrupt? I've heard opinions and hearsay almost constantly for 3 years but not one single factual piece of evidence.
.
If you assume he must have done something wrong in order to be impeached you have drastically underestimated the amount of power and money in play.

@pripyatplatypus, when that rich person buys another house, doesnt that crate a demand for people to step in and build that house?
.
Also, yes it's designed to reward people for economic accomplishment. That reward is the motivation that has driven entrepreneurs to take a risk, build a company, and create opportunity for non-entrepreneurs to punch a clock and make a living. No reward means no entrepreneurs means no jobs opportunity for people who arent interested in the taking the risks of self employment.
.
My point is that in socialism, the families at the top stay at the top. Capitalism leaves the door wide open for new people to step in and rise to the top (and leave a wake of improved life quality along the way).

It's no secret that capitalism, conservatism, "trickle down economics" or whatever you want to call it is designed to create opportunity. And a consequence of that opportunity is that some people and families will eventually end up with much more wealth than others. The system opens doors, but people have to take it upon themselves to walk through them.
.
What blows my mind is that people truly believe that Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren are actually looking for their best interests. People honestly think that a Socialistic society works for anyone other than the "ruling class". And that makes it an enormous hypocrisy.
.
The reality is that EVERY government model requires a lower class. At least the GOP is honest about what it is and the system allows people to move up and down. Socialism temporarily lifts the bottom up a little but it pulls the people who try to move up back at the same time.

Just dont expect us to stop being prideful of the parts we like because of a past that was out of our control.

You bet, no objection here. Can we also agree that America is doing a lot of things better than everyone else right now?

Correction: I so love that SOME people are catching on the hypocrisy.