If one were accept the fiction that Trump didn't try to pressure Ukraine for his own political gain

[Tom Rinaldo]

This is what the Republicans would have us believe instead:

1) That Trump's own personal lawyer was for months orchestrating a campaign to do exactly that without any direction coming from Trump to do so. And that the President was totally clueless of it and/or did absolutely nothing to set his attorney straight. OR

2) That the entire diplomatic corp and national security apparatus involved with Ukraine below the level of Secretary of State all believed they saw enough persuasive evidence of exactly that to reach the conclusion that Trump was pressuring Ukraine to deliver political dirt for Trump's reelection campaign. And that the President was totally clueless that he was giving everyone that impression and/or did absolutely nothing to set the record straight with any other plausible reasons for his actions to members of his administration who saw the quid pro quo.

Anyone who would argue that Trump is "innocent" of extortion and bribery is instead arguing that the President is totally inept and incapable of running the executive branch of the U.S. Government when it comes to matters of vital national security. And that should be just as damning as the truth.

It is already uncontested that Trump totally disregarded unanimous contrary opinions from all of his senior national security and military advisors when he gave the green light to Turkey to betray our Kurdish allies. Now it is established that Trump totally disregarded unanimous contrary opinions from his senior national security and military advisors, and all experts on Ukraine, regarding the dangers of freezing military aid to that country and singling a weakening of support for that fragile democracy while it was fighting a Russian invasion.

These truths are uncontested and all establish Trump's total unfitness for office. He must be removed for reasons of national security even were one to argue that Trump is not in fact literally corrupt (which he is).

[The_Counsel]

1. Not Only That, But a Group of Diplomats is Doing All This on Rudy's Say-So...

...and not Trump's. Indeed, even the most complicit characters in this whole mess had a problem with Guilliani even being in the picture. Case in point: Mr. Bolton.

And we're CERTAIN those folks weren't going to follow through merely on Sondland's say-so--especially after what happened to Yovanovitch.

You know it's really too bad we're so divided in this nation. Common sense doesn't even move the needle anymore.

[Tom Rinaldo]

2. It wasn't long before it was clear to everyone that Guolliani spoke for Trump

People in State talked to Pompeo about Guilliani but Guilliani never was shut down. We now have the "transcript" where Trump personally told Zelensky to talk to Guilliani (and Barr).

None of the national security experts would have put up with Guilliani let alone follow instructions from him without knowing that Trump was directing it. Guilliani had no standing in any formal chain of command other than the fact that he got his authority through Trump directly.

Yet the nonsense continues that we lack evidence of Trump's own orders. Again, for any other explanation to be proposed other than Trump's direct complicity, Trump would have to be a totally inept and dangerous idiot who had no say in the implementation of U.S. foreign policy while near civil war was erupting inside his administration. That is other than his ordering military aid to Ukraine being held up for reasons that he refused to explain to anyone at the time. We heard testimony that suspension was done at his order.Illegal suspension done without even consulting with or informing Congress which passed the bill authorizing it.

[The_Counsel]

3. This. ALL of This.

And how about allegedly intelligent and well-reasoned people insisting there was no "quid pro quo," extortion or bribery because no one seems to have ever heard Trump actually use those terms? The actual EVIDENCE isn't enough? Trump actually has to be stupid enough to SAY those things OUT LOUD, otherwise everything's all good?

So, if I were to rob a bank tomorrow, as long as I don't actually STATE THE OBVIOUS in the course of the crime, everything's everything? Ridiculous.

So again, I paraphrase Rev. William Barber: "How would you react if it were President Obama or Clinton behaving this way? Do THAT."