(11-05-2019 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 04:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I think the problem is that it looks like the president was asking this country to create evidence OF illegal behavior and not just show what actually happened.

Oh really? Where?

This pretty much lays it all out. The Burisma thing was pretty much cleared by Ukraine until rudy got involved.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timel...rainegate/

(11-06-2019 09:40 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 04:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I think the problem is that it looks like the president was asking this country to create evidence OF illegal behavior and not just show what actually happened.

Oh really? Where?

This pretty much lays it all out. The Burisma thing was pretty much cleared by Ukraine until rudy got involved.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timel...rainegate/

As I stated in the other thread, I looked up the organization that published this, and their top management and advisory board overwhelmingly lean hard left.

That doesn't necessarily mean that narrative is false, but it does means that it came from a non-objective source. Therefore there is a high probability of spin, and that spin would be expected to go one way.

I'd be more inclined to believe the narrative if it came from a more objective source.

(11-06-2019 09:45 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 09:40 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 04:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I think the problem is that it looks like the president was asking this country to create evidence OF illegal behavior and not just show what actually happened.

Oh really? Where?

This pretty much lays it all out. The Burisma thing was pretty much cleared by Ukraine until rudy got involved.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timel...rainegate/

As I stated in the other thread, I looked up the organization that published this, and their top management and advisory board overwhelmingly lean hard left.

That doesn't necessarily mean that narrative is false, but it does means that it came from a non-objective source. Therefore there is a high probability of spin, and that spin would be expected to go one way.

I'd be more inclined to believe the narrative if it came from a more objective source.

does one exist anymore?

(11-06-2019 09:45 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 09:40 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 04:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I think the problem is that it looks like the president was asking this country to create evidence OF illegal behavior and not just show what actually happened.

Oh really? Where?

This pretty much lays it all out. The Burisma thing was pretty much cleared by Ukraine until rudy got involved.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timel...rainegate/

As I stated in the other thread, I looked up the organization that published this, and their top management and advisory board overwhelmingly lean hard left.

That doesn't necessarily mean that narrative is false, but it does means that it came from a non-objective source. Therefore there is a high probability of spin, and that spin would be expected to go one way.

I'd be more inclined to believe the narrative if it came from a more objective source.

Nearly every bullet point has a link. Did you read any of them? Or just dismiss the whole thing?

(11-06-2019 09:52 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 09:45 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-06-2019 09:40 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 10:47 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(11-05-2019 04:21 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  I think the problem is that it looks like the president was asking this country to create evidence OF illegal behavior and not just show what actually happened.

Oh really? Where?

This pretty much lays it all out. The Burisma thing was pretty much cleared by Ukraine until rudy got involved.
https://www.justsecurity.org/66271/timel...rainegate/

As I stated in the other thread, I looked up the organization that published this, and their top management and advisory board overwhelmingly lean hard left.
That doesn't necessarily mean that narrative is false, but it does means that it came from a non-objective source. Therefore there is a high probability of spin, and that spin would be expected to go one way.
I'd be more inclined to believe the narrative if it came from a more objective source.

Nearly every bullet point has a link. Did you read any of them? Or just dismiss the whole thing?

Yes, I read most of it. They mostly point to statements of individuals that sound self-serving, a form of hearsay instead of hard evidence. Lawyers like me prefer hard evidence to hearsay.

There may be hard evidence, but this ain't it.