Seek out facts in weighing Trump’s impeachment

Editor:

I was recently accused of writing without laying out the law and ignoring a litany of alleged facts – he even relies on Russian President for his information and never read House rules to know they were the same rules the Republican House used for President Clinton….And so it went.

First, I have never written to defend Vice President Biden’s son as it’s not relevant. He survived the car crash that killed his mother and sisters but ended up being a black sheep. (But even if the kid was relevant, his father did his job. That is why there was no outcry at the time.)

In respect to basic fact and law few read 5 to 7 papers a day and have the advantage of basically a lifetime of further education. (Just don’t ask me to fix the plumbing – two left thumbs.)

Every person deserves the opportunity to see the world through eyes others than Fox’s or a big name news organization produced at the dining room table. (i.e. Breitbart). This is particularly important since we live in a Congressional District that embarrassed itself just last year. It ignored lip readers and conclusive documents and reelected a felon, ex Rep. Collins, to Congress. Therefore I think it’s a wonderful thing if people start reading more and asking questions.

Since space is limited this list is fairly good starting point.

For law:

1.  Trump’s Impeachable Conduct Strikes at the Heart of the Rule of Law: Part 1

2. “High Crimes and Misdemeanors,” explained

3. Trump Didn’t Bribe Ukraine. It’s Actually Worse Than That.

For an accurate chronology of relevant fact:

The ultimate guide to the Donald Trump impeachment saga

I hope every reader, including Mr. Harker, will find this interesting, if not eye opening, fact and law.

P.S. Mr. Harker can call me what he wants. He repeats Kremlin talking points that were first in Russia Today. The fact is I am a centrist.

Very truly yours,

Conrad F. Cropsey

Albion