Name:   CRD - Subject:   CRD I suggest in your spare time you Date:   12/22/2019 7:28:25 AM

Archie, I look at it this way.  During the holiday season lets create an analogy.  The Constitution is like a recipe, the Rules of Evidence are the ingredients.  Without ingredients obviously, the recipe is nice to have in your kitchen ready to reference when needed, but in reality, it does not really lead to an end product.  YOU HAVE A TRANSCRIPT IN FRONT OF YOU.  No fact witnesses except Sondland, who verified Trump's position.  Hearsay evidence that is addressed in Rule 802, Article VIII of the Federal Rules of Evidence.  

Now the question as to whether I would support the same if the President had a D beside their name, if evidence failed to show a high CRIME and Misdemeanor, then yes.  I currently am trying to wrap my hands around the fact that unverified evidence was provided to a FISA court in order to spy on a US citizen and presidential campaign and I hear nothing but crickets from you guys and the media.  But you want me to get my panties in a wad over Trump requesting that a foreign government investigate its own corruption before receiving my hard earned tax dollars?  Sorry Arch, you guys have tipped over the edge