re: Does Trump's ties to Saudi / LIV Golf bother anyone?

quote:

---

Your angle is, that the whistleblower who never heard the call, and a few lib loyalist diplomats who offered their personal interpretations of known language are to be believed, but Zelensky, Trump (in their own words and by their own intentions), and literally everyone else involved arent? And the transcript that shows they are full of shite is of course "modified" LOL. Of course it is! The real version is sitting next to Schiff's collusion evidence. Complete with NYT link!

---

So a whistleblower, multiple diplomats, Trump official alleging that the transcript was heavily edited isn't evidence?

And Zelensky, a man whose political interest is in lying here for his own country's benefit.... great work!

quote:

---

Get this shite the frick out of here, junior. You are just stomping your size 6.5 yeezy and insisting a load of political lawfare was real, while ignoring Biden violating the same "code" on camera in the most obnoxiously brazen way possible.

---

You seriously thought you could try and argue that the transcript exculpated Trump...

quote:

---

I dont even know where to start here.

---

Seriously? You seriously tried arguing that the transcript was evidence that it exculpated Trump. I'm not sure I can respond any further.

quote:

---

There's no way you are a real person.

---

I can assure you I'm real. The DOJ is meant to be independent - again, I ask you where you got the notion that the DOJ is not meant to be independent?

A president instructing the DOJ to investigate a specific case on potential political opponents is absolutely wrong-doing. You can't be serious trying to argue that this makes Trump look good or is not wrong-doing.

And in any case, voters rejected Trump at the ballot box which is all that matters at the end of the day. It doesn't matter what you or I think - voters rejected Trump so I'm okay with that.

quote:

---

Foreign world leaders of large countries (>$1 trillion GDP) attending business events with the Trump organization? If you do so, I'll take back my words.

---

In 2010, Ivanka Trump stood next to edrogan announcing the trump towers in Turkey.

quote:

---

So a whistleblower, multiple diplomats, Trump official alleging that the transcript was heavily edited isn't evidence?

---

So the whistleblower not only was NOT party to the conversation, making his testimony inadmissible in a US court of law, he was later shown to have coordinated with Schiff's staffers prior to making his claims. Vindman, who is a naked partisan, had his loyalty to the US questioned after reports surfaced that Ukraine had offered him a job as their Minister of Defense. Yovanovitch is an Obama holdover who herself was implicated in Biden's own Ukraine QPQ years earlier and was accused by Ukrainian anti-corruption prosecutors of handing them a "do not prosecute" list. Sounds like a lovely gal. The others are all known partisans who were either not party to the call, or offered their "interpretations" and "opinions" of Trump and Zelensky's conversation. So no. Not really solid evidence there, which is why the impeachment wouldnt stick. It was conjured Schiff theater - who was proven to be a liar after the Russia Collusion fiasco. Pelosi didnt even want Schiff to do this, but he did it anyway and failed.
When the administration called their bluff and released the transcript, showing the witnesses were liars, rags like WaPo claimed it could "possibly be altered" because there were "ellipses" and that's "uncommon". LOL

quote:

---

You seriously thought you could try and argue that the transcript exculpated Trump...

---

The conversation that allegedly condemns him? Yes, considering there is not a single mention of withholding aid in exchange for any investigation. The only talk of US support was in juxtaposition to Germany's lack thereof, and there were several potential probes discussed including Crowdstrike.

quote:

---

I can assure you I'm real. The DOJ is meant to be independent - again, I ask you where you got the notion that the DOJ is not meant to be independent?

A president instructing the DOJ to investigate a specific case on potential political opponents is absolutely wrong-doing. You can't be serious trying to argue that this makes Trump look good or is not wrong-doing.

---

You can pretend presidents dont or shouldnt call for investigations, but it only makes you look like a naive and insipid little child. They all do. And running for president does not give you immunity from federal investigations. Trump himself is evidence of that.
Further, you can't feign indignation about impartiality in the DOJ under the leadership of president Liverspot and AG Merrick "school moms are terrorists" Garland. Barr was no friend to Trump anyway. Sessions failed him, and Rosenstien offered to wear a wire around him. That should be clear to everyone by now.

Except you, apparently.

I mean I could respond further but we're just going to disagree.

At this point, nobody is changing their minds.

At the end of the day, it doesn't matter.

Trump was rejected by the American people for whatever reason - it doesn't matter what we think on a politics board.

I've always been clear that Trump shouldn't have been impeached - it's the job of voters to get rid of candidates, not policymakers. In any case, voters rejected Trump and I'll leave it at that.

Edit: How convenient... every official seems to be failing Trump and not the other way around...

quote:

---

Yet pages of hissy stating otherwise. Weird

---

My responses have been to your hypocrisy on Trump/Biden, not because I personally care enough. And like I said, me arguing is an enjoyable past-time for me.

While I personally believe that Trump was corrupt (much like you believe that Biden is corrupt), that's the job of voters to decide.

quote:

---

Not every, but certainly many. The swamp is deep. You disagree?

---

I mean it suggests to me that he's not the best picker of people if that many people are failing him.

But someone who wins a presidential election is someone who has the ability to pick the best people, which leads to the alternative reasoning that people didn't fail him but he failed them.

quote:

---

My responses have been to your hypocrisy on Trump/Biden, not because I personally care enough. And like I said, me arguing is an enjoyable past-time for me.

---

You think Im being a hypocrite, but what does that make you? My guy has been investigated and prosecuted into the rubble by absolute demons, and cleared every time. Yours has more red flags than a used car lot. The lack of action does not innocence make.

quote:

---

While I personally believe that Trump was corrupt (much like you believe that Biden is corrupt), that's the job of voters to decide.

---

I would hope criminal activity at the highest levels would be handled by the justice system, but apparently we are not allowed to investigate presidential candidates not named Donald Trump.

quote:

---

I mean it suggests to me that he's not the best picker of people if that many people are failing him.

But someone who wins a presidential election is someone who has the ability to pick the best people, which leads to the alternative reasoning that people didn't fail him but he failed them.

---

You could reason that. And in some cases, you'd be right. He was a political neophyte who vastly underestimated the rot and will for self-preservation in DC. Ultimately, you cannot be a true change agent... a necessary disruptor.... and staff thousands in DC with people who wont ever turn their backs on you or take the 30 pieces of silver from the opposition. It happens at some level to all of them. I could point to Dick Morris or Jonathan Gruber as examples. Ultimately Barr did agree that Burisma needed to be investigated, and if Garland were indeed as impartial as you think he is, he would have continued that process but he didnt.

It’s golf, who gives a shite?

quote:

---

Did you see my post about ivanka and edrogan?

---

Yes, I saw your post.

I asked for a world leader, you gave me the leader of a country with a GDP barely larger than Sweden. Turkey has a GDP less than $750 billion.

And in any case, as Eric Trump said, it's 'the appearance of impropriety' that matters much like in the case of Hunter Biden.

quote:

---

I asked for a world leader, you gave me the leader of a country with a GDP barely larger than Sweden. Turkey has a GDP less than $750 billion.

---

it was their first Trump Tower overseas. So much for you trying to have honest discourse. Don’t know why I gave you the benefit of the doubt.

You would have had a lot more credibility to graciously take the L on that line of accusations.

Just you and tex, and mickey. HHTM, Lakeboy, Tboy, and Hank also.