To be fair, I have only read the relevant parts of Section 1. 

I never claimed that Trump was a good or altruistic person. I think you're making huge assumptions about what I'm saying.

Yes, Trump tried to do something illegal, probably found out it was illegal afterwards and then had to comply with the law. 

What matters is if they can find evidence of his intentions. His base will believe that he was simply trying to stop corruption. The opposition say that it was a selfish move to attempt to crush a political opponent. We need proof of his intentions or not one Republican is going to vote to impeach in the Senate.

You expect Trump to break the law himself, and get caught doing so, before any action can take place?

Trump knows better, if he wants to break the law, he gets others  to do it for him, so they can take the blame,
and/or he can throw them under the bus, if it goes wrong.

Its happend too many times now, that you cant claim its not a pattern.

So what you are saying is that Trump tried to do something illegal, was turned down by his administration, only released the aid when found out.  So in your mind, trying to do something illegal and only not doing it because you got found out is no big deal.  I guess this is the state we live in now where people excuse intent because they did not get caught instead of looking at the intent.

You really have to do some gymnastic leaps to make Trump look good here.  When you say there is no evidence to what Trump tried to do, you basically are throwing away sworn in testimony by people involved in the whole dumb stunt as if it doesn't carry any weight but for some reason you are willing to believe that Trump only had the best interest of the US at heart instead of his own personal gain.

What exactly in Trump past, or even the present that make you believe he is this altruistic person.  I guess you are one of the people who believes Trump never lies its all the media making false statements.  I am sure you are probably one of the people who do not believe the corruption shown by Trump during his time not as president but somehow he is this generous person who create colleges and charities to help people.

You would be the perfect mark for a con man.  A person who wants to believe so much you will doubt your own eyes and heart in hope that someone isn't what they show you who they are. 

Either way, I am sure before Trump leaves office he will give you ample opportunity to find ways to defend him when he could not find anyone in his administration to do so.  For someone who has to forbid anyone in his administration to not testify to congress he sure shows how much trust he has in what he was doing.  Withholding documents and pretty much obstructing the process is all he can do because as long as he has people willing to ignore whats right in from of them, making sure they have the least amount of info helps him keep those people ignorant.

I never claimed that Trump was a good or altruistic person. I think you're making huge assumptions about what I'm saying.

Yes, Trump tried to do something illegal, probably found out it was illegal afterwards and then had to comply with the law. 

What matters is if they can find evidence of his intentions. His base will believe that he was simply trying to stop corruption. The opposition say that it was a selfish move to attempt to crush a political opponent. We need proof of his intentions or not one Republican is going to vote to impeach in the Senate.

I agree that I am making an assumption on how you view Trump.  

You state that if the Dems can find evidence of his intentions then all is good.  I am wondering how you seem to dismiss all the sworn in testimony by the people directly involved in the whole situation.  So in a criminal investigation when they cannot find the gun that killed someone but they have sworn in testimony of people directly involved in the incident and they not only show intent but also every move up to the incident and after that shows what the person did, how is that not enough.  What you are basically saying is that as long as the gun is not found, then its ok, and you are willing to throw out everything else.

Isn't sworn in testimony important in understanding something like this situation.  A person do not have to come out and actually state like some comic book villain what their intention is, people who willing to go under oath and testify to what they seen and heard is how we get to the truth.  Can these people be lying, yes they can and as was shone by Mueller, liars can be found guilty and prosecuted.

The President had every opportunity to find witnesses to counter what these people stated but not only did he not produce any, even the Republican witnesses could not do the same.  I am not sure what else you may need but I hope its not depending on Trump base to find some excuse to his action.  Excuses are very easy to come by as we have seen during the impeachment trial but excuses is all they turned out to be.

I agree that I am making an assumption on how you view Trump.  

You state that if the Dems can find evidence of his intentions then all is good.  I am wondering how you seem to dismiss all the sworn in testimony by the people directly involved in the whole situation.  So in a criminal investigation when they cannot find the gun that killed someone but they have sworn in testimony of people directly involved in the incident and they not only show intent but also every move up to the incident and after that shows what the person did, how is that not enough.  What you are basically saying is that as long as the gun is not found, then its ok, and you are willing to throw out everything else.

Isn't sworn in testimony important in understanding something like this situation.  A person do not have to come out and actually state like some comic book villain what their intention is, people who willing to go under oath and testify to what they seen and heard is how we get to the truth.  Can these people be lying, yes they can and as was shone by Mueller, liars can be found guilty and prosecuted.

The President had every opportunity to find witnesses to counter what these people stated but not only did he not produce any, even the Republican witnesses could not do the same.  I am not sure what else you may need but I hope its not depending on Trump base to find some excuse to his action.  Excuses are very easy to come by as we have seen during the impeachment trial but excuses is all they turned out to be.

But which sworn testimony are you referring to?

The difference between a murder case and this is that corruption by US Officials (Biden) is Trump's business. His base believe he was just doing his job. We need someone to testify to his intentions.

The latest data show that Americans have started to reject impeachment:

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/public_approval_of_the_impeachment_and_removal_of_president_trump-6957.html

If nobody can testify that Trump wanted Biden investigated not because of corruption but because he is a rival, then Trump looks like the victorious underdog in this whole thing and wins 2020.

How is corruption by Biden is Trump business.  There is actually nothing that says corruption within another country is the sole purpose of the president and even if there were, the people under him swore he only cared if there was a public declaration of it.  He care nothing about whether something actually was done. 

Either way, if this is the president business then we have all the proper channels to handle it but instead we have Trump personal lawyer doing the work.  When you can answer why Trump personal lawyer is the one doing the work you probably have a point.  Actually, Giuliani is the achilles heels to this whole dumb stunt.  He is what makes something that Trump could have easily not shone personal and political bias but sending Giuliani to handle the business tells a different story.  Then you have Giuliani going on record saying he was doing the President business as his lawyer doesn't help as well.  I guess its easy to just throw that part out because he did not testify but man would I love for him to take the stand on the Senate trial.  

Not sure what makes you think something like this will auto win Trump for 2020.  There is one thing that these polls do not say, does this affect your vote in 2020.  People may support impeachment but not him being removed from office.  I know a few people in my circle believe he did wrong but not enough to be removed from office.  Now as to whether this will decide if they vote for Trump in 2020, well the 2 does not correspond with each other.

There is a long way to go before we even get to that date and outside of just getting impeached he will have to show he is still fit.  I personally cannot wait to see him debate anyone come that time if some of his rallies is any indication of his mental health.