Jump to content


The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election


Recommended Posts


15 minutes ago, QMany said:

 

 

" 'Everything' was dependent on such an announcement, including security assistance," top US diplomat to Ukraine Taylor testified, adding that Trump wanted Zelensky "in a public box" by making a statement about ordering the investigations. Taylor testified a National Security Council official told him that Trump insisted Zelensky "go to a microphone and say he is opening investigations of Biden and 2016 interference."

 

"[Zelensky] had to announce the investigations. He didn’t actually have to do them, as I understood it." Sondland, US Ambassador appointed by Trump after giving him $1M.

 

Did Donald Trunp try to get foreign countries to investigate Joe Biden?

 

Duh

 

Was it solely for Political leveraging?

 

No

  • Plus1 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment

8 minutes ago, funhusker said:

So not to hold anyone accountable? 

 

I think Trump probably wanted the investigation because he knew it would make him look bad AND because he thought it needed investigating.  Simple as that.  This doesn't make it right, doesnt make how he went about it right.

 

I think Biden withheld funds solely for himself and found a nice cover story way to do it.

 

Be outraged about both or neither.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Redux said:

Was it solely for Political leveraging?

 

No

 

Other than political leveraging, what was the purpose of an announcement!?!

Again, "he didn't actually have to do them" (the investigations). 

 

42 minutes ago, Redux said:

I think Trump probably wanted the investigation because he knew it would make him look bad AND because he thought it needed investigating.  Simple as that.

With a straight face, you're saying Donald Trump cares about corruption!?!

 

42 minutes ago, Redux said:

I think Biden withheld funds solely for himself and found a nice cover story way to do it.

 

Be outraged about both or neither.

 

Is there any evidence of that? Narrator: no, none.

Vindman, Williams, and Volker (off the top of my head, there may be even more) all testified that there was no credible evidence of this conspiracy theory. 

 

Don't you see the false equivalency? If not, that is exactly the willful ignorance I mentioned above. 

I am all for an good-faith political debate on the facts; you don't appear to be here for that.

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment
6 minutes ago, QMany said:

 

Other than political leveraging, what was the purpose of an announcement!?!

Again, "he didn't actually have to do them" (the investigations). 

 

With a straight face, you're saying Donald Trump cares about corruption!?!

 

 

Is there any evidence of that? Narrator: no, none.

Vindman, Williams, and Volker (off the top of my head, there may be even more) all testified that there was no credible evidence of this conspiracy theory. 

 

Don't you see the false equivalency? If not, that is exactly the willful ignorance I mentioned above. 

I am all for an good-faith political debate on the facts; you don't appear to be here for that.

Just to be 100% clear.  If there is no evidence, it, no matter what it is, never happened, correct?

  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
9 minutes ago, QMany said:

 

Other than political leveraging, what was the purpose of an announcement!?!

Again, "he didn't actually have to do them" (the investigations). 

 

With a straight face, you're saying Donald Trump cares about corruption!?!

 

 

Is there any evidence of that? Narrator: no, none.

Vindman, Williams, and Volker (off the top of my head, there may be even more) all testified that there was no credible evidence of this conspiracy theory. 

 

Don't you see the false equivalency? If not, that is exactly the willful ignorance I mentioned above. 

I am all for an good-faith political debate on the facts; you don't appear to be here for that.

 

Well placed trap, regardless of how I respond, I'm wrong.  Check and mate amirite!?

Link to comment

I’ll say this: if a Biden investigation shows that he acted “solely” in self interest and made a point to not involve normal personnel to make a decision on how to spend tax dollars, even though “technically” legal, I would not feel comfortable with him in office.

 

And I feel the same way about Trump.  Although I’ll admit there are many things that come directly out of Trumps mouth that make me uncomfortable with him as our President.

 

@Redux, I’ll admit I’m rooting against Trump.  Absolutely.  That’s why people are going so hard on this; because he WAS in the wrong, it WAS an abuse of power, and his opponents finally have something that isn’t based on political perspective: we ALL (sane people) agree it was wrong.  The crazy kid finally needs stitches after the parents have been yelling the past 3 years to “calm down before someone gets hurt!”

 

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, funhusker said:

I’ll say this: if a Biden investigation shows that he acted “solely” in self interest and made a point to not involve normal personnel to make a decision on how to spend tax dollars, even though “technically” legal, I would not feel comfortable with him in office.

 

And I feel the same way about Trump.  Although I’ll admit there are many things that come directly out of Trumps mouth that make me uncomfortable with him as our President.

 

@Redux, I’ll admit I’m rooting against Trump.  Absolutely.  That’s why people are going so hard on this; because he WAS in the wrong, it WAS an abuse of power, and his opponents finally have something that isn’t based on political perspective: we ALL (sane people) agree it was wrong.  The crazy kid finally needs stitches after the parents have been yelling the past 3 years to “calm down before someone gets hurt!”

 

 

 

Well said. Thank you.

 

I believe he acted in self interest AND because it was his job.  I think that about both of them.  I don't think either are clean here.

 

But would this even be a story if this were president Obama?  Would anyone care about the Republicans crying foul?  Cheer against Trump, that's perfectly fine.  A lot of the outrage looks hypocritical to me, that's all.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
11 minutes ago, funhusker said:

I’ll say this: if a Biden investigation shows that he acted “solely” in self interest and made a point to not involve normal personnel to make a decision on how to spend tax dollars, even though “technically” legal, I would not feel comfortable with him in office.

 

And I feel the same way about Trump.  Although I’ll admit there are many things that come directly out of Trumps mouth that make me uncomfortable with him as our President.

 

@Redux, I’ll admit I’m rooting against Trump.  Absolutely.  That’s why people are going so hard on this; because he WAS in the wrong, it WAS an abuse of power, and his opponents finally have something that isn’t based on political perspective: we ALL (sane people) agree it was wrong.  The crazy kid finally needs stitches after the parents have been yelling the past 3 years to “calm down before someone gets hurt!”

 

 

Good post!

Link to comment
57 minutes ago, Redux said:

 

Well said. Thank you.

 

I believe he acted in self interest AND because it was his job.  I think that about both of them.  I don't think either are clean here.

 

But would this even be a story if this were president Obama?  Would anyone care about the Republicans crying foul?  Cheer against Trump, that's perfectly fine.  A lot of the outrage looks hypocritical to me, that's all.

But the thing is that Biden did his actions out in the wide open.  He did it with the support of everyone that should be involved with the process.  You may rightfully believe he personally benefited, no one is saying you can’t hold that opinion. But at the same time, US policy moved forward with the actions that benefitted him.

 

You have admitted that Trump was looking for dirt and not much else.  Why would that dirt help US policy?  Biden may have personally benefited from “proper” US foreign policy, but Trump tried to personally/politically benefit from “improper” foreign policy.  That’s the difference, and a big one as I understand it.

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...