Oh yeah like the time biden did a quid quo pro to protect his son, then tried to impeach trump for it. Nope not that. Wait the time Hillary paid a foreigner to get dirt dirt on trump from Russia. Then started an investigation into trump for colliding with Russia. That must be it
Coincidentally, i was indeed thinking about the time trump did the quid pro quo and then tried to say it was biden who did one. Or the time trump got a foreigner to get dirt on hillary from russia but then tried to say that Hillary did it. Your version of events is precisely the sort of republican talking point you were supposed to be pretending you aren't interested in, though. You aren't a very good troll if you're going to give yourself away after the first comment..
Weird biden was on tape bragging about quid quo pro and trump released the transcript of the call and there was no quid pro quo. Yeah that who Russian dossier that hillary paid Ukrainian and russia for must not exist. There is also the 2+ year investigation of trump that came up with nothing. Yeah I guess all it is all trump.
Well, everything you said didn't actually happen, even though trump said it did. So...
Actually it I did. The video of biden bragging is easy to find. So is transcript of the call with no quid pro quo.
Yeah, that's out of context. And the testimony of the witnesses to the intelligence committee was pretty conclusive for any who actually heard it. Clearly you didn't. But that's fine. You probably should be more concerned with the fact that #TrumpWillNukeRussia
Please explain the context of demanding the investor looking into his son get fired or he will withhold government money?I read the transcript, why do I need second hand interpretation? That witness also said the transcript was accurate didn't he?Lol now trump is going to nuke russia? I thought he was working for russia? You should take some time to get you lies straight
The context would be the full discussion, not just the clips that seem to support your talking point. That's like propaganda 101.Also, the transcript was only the thing that pointed to the possibility of unconstitutional behavior and is why an investigation was launched. The investigation found two things: one, everyone who testified under oath said trump did crime. Trump told a lot of people not to testify under oath. These are fact. As you clearly prefer to believe that mass perjury occurred rather than consider the possibility that a professional liar is lying yet again, I consider you either a Russian troll or so influenced it makes no difference.And as for nuking Russia. We all know the way Putin convinced trump to run in the first place was by blackmailing him with tapes he has of trump with a child prostitute. Trump supporters I our county would still support him even if he raped a wailing half dead child in the middle of fifth avenue. And trumps opponents have a vendetta against Putin on general principle. So, whenever Trump gets tired of being blackmailed, #TrumpWillNukeRussia which will vaporize the dirt Putin has on trump and I ite the left and right in the U. S. He doesn't want to pass on a legacy like that, so really it's just a matter of time.
You are so predictable I knew you would call me a Russian troll.Please explain the context with biden so can understand? You are clearly super smart and can see something I can't.From what I see, bidens son was kicked out of the navy for drug ( seriously how bad do you need to be to be the vice peeaidents son and still get kicked out). Then biden went to Ukraine and told them they should invest more money on energy. The state run energy company hires bidens son to be on the board of directors. He has no experience in energy or Ukraine law so of course it makes sense to hire him at like 80k a month. Next an investigator looking into corruption starts looking into it. Biden threatens to withhold money if the prosecutor isn't fired. The prosecutor is then fired, biden keeps his job making tons of money and Ukraine gets the money. Biden is stupid/corrupt enough to go publicly speak and tell everyone how he broke the law. Yup looking at the full context clears it all up...
So you think someone should be convicted because someone thinks someone else broke the law? No evidence only second hearsay and opinion? You must not know anything about this legal system. Anyway if that was true why wasn't trump impeached for quid pro quo or bribery... oh yeah because even the most corrupt Democrats know that's a bunch of bs.
All that stupidity about the child and sex sounds a lot like the fake info Hillary paid a bunch of Russians who she thought were from ukraine to create a fake dossier. Lol
It's one of those "quacks like a duck" things. It's true you should see it coming when you get called a duck :-DAnyway, I already explained all that. Feel free to re-read - or read for the first time, as the case is more likely to be. Not that it matters. I understand it's your job to have a blind spot for facts, hoping to replace them with far-right myth because it fits the narrative you've been told to push. I'm not clear if you're just practicing your trolling here or if this is really one of the places where y'all are trying to get your propaganda off the ground. I guess both is likely. But clearly this attempt fell flat because you only got me, who also uses this site for practice. See, I can't really figure out what frustrates trump supporters. Y'all just ignore logic, so being proven wrong doesn't frustrate you. And telling outright lies is kind-of your whole strategy, so telling outright lies right back to you is like trying to beat you at your own game. So, yeah. I've been using this site to figure out what really gets trump supporters to notice a situation. But so far it's like there's just nothing there to work with. I don't get how people so oblivious can hold to such strong opinions. That they have them in the first place makes sense - that's your job (and others like you), and I don't doubt your good at it. I mean obviously - you don't get half a country to vote against their interests by being bad at manipulation. But why are trump supporters so loyal? Is it really just spite? That's the man behind the curtain here? Trump supporters are really just still mad that a black guy achieved more than them? So useless..
You have given zero facts all you do is dance and provide half of a story and opinion. Please explain why what biden did wasn't quid pro pro?Biden admitted to committing a crime and trump is trying to investigate it. End of story.
like I said, I'd have to view the whole exchange. Not just the part clipped to give the appearance of fitting your talking point.
I have seen the entire clip. I guess I'm not as smart as you. Why dont you explain why blatently withholding money to protect him and son isn't illegal
as I've said twice now, I'd have to see the whole exchange. Which, frankly, I'm just not interested in. There are channels to investigate this by people who's job it is to do so. It is not my job. It is, in fact, not the president's job, either. As anyone who actually heard the sworn testimony could tell you (or you could tell yourself if you watched them, which you won't), trump did not use those channels. Instead he withheld congressionally mandated military aid to ukraine unless they announced an investigation. He made it quite clear he didn't actually want an investigation - he just wanted an announcement of it so people like you could share the clip of the announcement all across the internet this coming November. I get that the impeachment is making your job slightly harder. But don't expect sympathy from me.
So I have seen the full tape of biden admitting quid pro pro, posted facts about getting his son a job. You won't watch video and know nothing about it but are saying I'm wrong? There was no announcement of an investigation. Maybe you missed the top 3 people in Ukraine saying there was no quid pro quo and the prime minister didn't even know funding was delayed.I saw the sworn testimony was hearsay and opion.
Hearsay can be valid testimony depending on what is heard and said. And all the opinions came from the republicans. There was no announcement of an investigation because trump got caught just days before the announcement was planned. Which is also something you would know if you had watched the testimony.Ukraine knew the aid was being withheld. Also something you would know if you had watched the testimony. The fact that this is true but you insist it is not tells me that your mind is already made up, and you are determined to ignore any fact that might contradict the way you want to imagine things are.And as for the full clip, as I say, I haven't seen it, wouldn't know where to find it, and honestly wouldn't care if Biden gets locked in a cell tonight because of it. You see, unlike you, I don't want the politicians I support to get away with everything they can get away with. My loyalty is akin to that one would give "the enemy of my enemy." It is not some wide-eyed gullibility about a professional con man conning everyone except me. Or do trump supporters know they are being conned and just don't care because the spite is that strong?
I dont know what to say the proof is out there just because it doesn't fit you narrative doesn't make it less true.You accept hearsay and opinion over looking at the evidence yourself. The transcripts are public and easy to find. Why would want hearsay rather than looking what was actually said.
If the proof is out there, let the proper channels investigate it. That is their job. And I'm fine with any outcome. Asking me to judge instead of asking a judge to judge is a propaganda trick.You keep going back to the transcript, as though you forgot to read the last time I pointed out to you that the transcript was only used to corroborate the whistleblower complaint, which suggested the possibility of an abuse of power. This lended validation to the need for an investigation - the transcript was not the result of the investigation, but the start. This is all something you should already know because it has been said repeatedly by those involved in the investigation, and I've said it repeatedly as well. The fact that you're not letting it sink in only confirms that you just want trump to get away with it. You can admit that, if it helps. I already know, so really you're just admitting it to yourself, at this point..
shouldn't Ukraine investigate crimes in Ukraine? I would thin a president asking other president to investage a criminal in their country is th proper channel. Are there other crimes biden committed that you are referring to.There was no abuse of power the transcript proves that. What happened to the whistle blower anyway? He seems to have disappeared since it came out he worked with biden in Ukraine and we found he met with Schiffs office to write the complaint. He should really testify.
The thing is that the transcript doesn't prove anything except that the whistleblower wasn't just a random guy.And at this point the whistleblower's testimony is uneccisary. Everything he alleged has already been confirmed by others under oath. Again, this is something you would be aware of if you had watched the testimony. Which, again, is exactly why you have avoided doing so. You desperately want him to get away with it and are thus blocking out any possible source of information that could tell you he is guilty of something. I completely understand that, even if I don't agree.
Wow you just keep making stuff up. Go read the transcript
Is there some reason you keep ignoring my responses? Just want to cling to your illusion that I haven't given one? Part of that "please just let him get away with it" Republican platform, I guess..
I'm not ignoring anything please stop pretending there us proof of wrongdoing.
You ignored my description of the process.
Lol, right wind. That’s actually pretty suitable, considering these talking points are mostly just people blowing wind. Freudian slip perhaps?
Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions