What favor did President Trump request of Ukraine President Zekensky?

It's an absolutely hilarious failure of critical thinking and logical reasoning.

Can you name a crime of Trump discovered by Meuller?

Yet the democratic partisan hacks impeached.

And yet he was not removed and the single party case from the house was dismissed. Reality matters Clem.

So in the vote to confirm or dismiss the impeachment, did half of the Senate vote for impeachment? Your claims don't even give a passing glance to reality.

No sir. I said that the majority of American people did not agree Trump should be impeached. You tried to change "impeached" into "did something wrong". And as yet, just like Meuller, you cannot show us anything Trump did wrong other than your biased opinion.

Then why did the founding fathers require the Senate to decide on it? The Senate found that the "impeachment" was a single party coup attempt. Trump was found to have done nothing wrong, and the impeachment was dismissed.

No, Democrats are not the house. They are only a single party in the house.

I said that a majority of Americans did not think Trump should have been impeached. This is true. Your semantic dancing now will not save you. 

I said nothing about them representing the majority. I said they were more representative than a single party. The majority of the Senate voted to dismiss. They represented the majority of Americans who also did not agree with impeachment, republicans, democrats, and independents.

Inferences should use evidence. But you have no evidence other than your bias. So you think you can substitute your bias for evidence.

I did not deny inference. I said inference alone cannot be used to convict anyone.

Nice try Chet. But as you yourself said, inference should be made from evidence, and I have demonstrated that you have no evidence. You pretend you bias is "evidence". It is not.

This is proven by reality in that Trump remains unconvicted of any crime. The standard you are trying to apply to Trump is the one used in countries like Iran and Congo, not the one stipulated by the US constitution.

Sorry, Mueller looked, the Senate looked, the Supreme Court looked, and the electorate looked. No thumbprints were found. Your inferences are based on your bias.

You only wish that America was a socialist nation, it is not. No one in America is convicted on inference alone. We have laws that prohibit that. And that is why Trump remains unconvicted.

The US Senate is uninformed? The constitution calls "them" citizens, and luckily, they are not judged by your biased standard. They have not been informed by your bias, I concede that.

"In my delusion" the Senate quashed the fake single party impeachment? And "in my delusion" Meuller found no crimes of Trump? Lol. OK Einstein.

Untrue. I said that the Senate disagrees with you. The proof is that they dismissed the impeachment. Trying to use the fakery of individual senators is deceptive.

I didn't say it was. Under our law, unindicted people are considered innocent, and innocent people need no exoneration. Your fascism, along with Bernie's socialism, has been rejected by the American people. 

Obstruction of justice

You're confusing Mueller's investigation with the Zelensky case.

We were discussing if "Very few of them" believed he should've been impeached

No. The slightly less than half did, which is more than "very few of them"

The topic revolves around about whether Trump did anything wrong in terms of Zelensky and public perception of such. Not whether the American people agree that Trump should've been impeached.

1. A vote for acquittal does not mean "done nothing wrong".

..this should be obvious given that Clinton clearly committed perjury and yet was also not removed

You're entitled to your interpretation of the intent of the senate, but note that it but one interpretation and poorly supported at that.

Actually false

The majority of the senate that voted to dismiss represents a minority of americans.

I'm sorry, but your interpretation of my inferences is wrong. I should know, because they are my inferences.

Do inferences use evidence or do they not use evidence?

If they do use evidence, why can't they be used to convict anyone?

Well many thumbprints have been found. Again, your biases are getting in the way.

Plenty of people in America are convicted on inference alone.

I'm sorry you're blind the state of your country.

No. I think they are just dishonest.

The citizens are uninformed however

Well you are delusional since Mueller did find crimes of Trump.

You've explicitly said that very few of the senate believed Trump should've been impeached which is what I addressed. 

I do believe denial of reality counts as a delusion.

It might surprise that it's not only used in the context of indictments.

Now quote the report saying so.

No sir. Its all the same case with you rabid democrats anyway.

"Them" referred to the American people. Now the democrats know that too.

All the democrats. Your single party coup failed.

You have shown nothing other than your bias that Trump did  wrong, and Trumps approval ratings increased after the sham impeachment. Sorry, reality matters.

OK Adolph, but in democracies, trials are to determine innocent or guilt, and unless the defendant is found guilty, the law considers him innocent, since that is what he was before the trial.

Clinton confessed. The evidence was there. The dems played politics. In Trumps case, you had no evidence, just a sham.

I have reality and law. Reality supports me.

I said that a majority of Americans did not think Trump should have been impeached. This is true. Your semantic dancing now will not save you. 

After you've danced yourself out, you'll see that it's true.

Going by how senators are apportioned, it is impossible for a majority of Senators to represent a minority of Americans. You need a civics class.

And the fact you're trying to dodge is still there. The Senate voted to dismiss the sham impeachment, and most of America agreed with that judgement.

You inferences alone cannot be used to convict anyone Clem. You lack evidence. And without evidence, your inferences are just subjective nonsense.

Your inferences don't because you have no evidence. That is why both the Meuller investigation and the impeachment trial came to the same conclusion. No evidence, so no charges against Trump. Its called reality Chet.

If. Your bias is not evidence. Get some real evidence. Something not dependant on your subjective and biased opinion, and Trump will be convicted. Until then, reality will always disappoint you.

Not in the way of reality apparently. Maybe Trump will one day be found guilty based just on your TDS. Keep hope alive!

And when the courts are alerted to such unconstitutionality, they reverse the convictions.

Lol. The state of my country will be fine as long as people like you, who want to convict on accusations and inference alone, never rise to power.

Right, democrats are honest. Lol.

And they will remain uninformed of your loony irrationality with Trump. One drumming of democratic elites was not enough. November has another lesson coming for you.

You address your strawman, not what I said. I said that the Senate disagrees with you. The proof is that they dismissed the impeachment. 

Right, there is tons of evidence but the senate is dishonest, and the supreme court is packed with conservatives, and Mueller was hamstrung, and the American people are dumb.

Do you know what it means when no one but you and Adam Shiff can see your "reality"?

OK Clem. Pay attention now. Have you been exonerated?

Stop being lazy.

Blatant lie. Or you've confused your own words.

Impeachment isn't a criminal trial. 

Vacuous statement

Vacuous statement

Blatant lie and/or confused own argument progression

Ironically, closer to the truth in satire than ever was in seriousness.

To what accusation? By who?