(11-21-2019 02:32 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-21-2019 12:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(11-21-2019 12:15 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(11-21-2019 10:45 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  used his office solely, and explicitly, to pressure a foreign government to produce a result that only benefits the POTUS personally? The accusations, which have support now, are that Trump was not acting in the interests of the US to try and push Ukraine to investigate corruption as a whole, but rather generate some news stories that would hurt Biden.

Care to rephrase? Lolz.

Solely, only, 'not acting in the interests of the United States'. Really?

I guess you see zero interest of the United States in the potential corruption, potential linkage to election meddling that has ties to the Ukraine. Really?

But the *sole* use of the office was to *only* benefit the POTUS personally.... And no action at all had any confluence with the interests of the United States.

Good grief and you get your wings worked up about our (or my) being hyperbolic. Double Lolz.

Here is the rich riposte, and I think I will actually quote you for this:

Quote: Hope that little tirade made you feel better.

So you disagree that Trump is being accused of what I laid out?

I disagree that Trump 'used his office solely, and explicitly, to pressure a foreign government to produce a result that only benefits the POTUS personally.' I disagree that that Trump was not acting in any way for the interests of the US to try and push Ukraine to investigate corruption as a whole.

Of course, since you steadfastly believe that there is zero issue with Hunter aside from a mere 'conflict of interest', and zero issue with calls from Hunters father to remove investigations of the company that Hunter was being paid 1.6 million per year as a do nothing director, I can readily see why you are adamant about the superlatives you put out there. I can readily see with those issues settled for you on an a priori and absolute steadfast basis why you caterwaul in the way that you do.

Ok good, we're at least on the same page that your quarrel isn't with what I wrote, but what you wanted me to write in regards to the previous post.

And again, I've never said I have zero issue - I think me saying multiple times that it was unethical is far from me having "zero issues" with it. But then again, you acknowledging that would take away your favorite tool in your argument utility belt - making someone defend a position they haven't taken.

And again, there is no, real evidence that Biden attempted to stop specific investigations - stop relying on the tainted source of Rudy Guiliani's notes for that claim.