Social Question

chyna's avatar

Now Trump wants to build a wall in Colorado. Seriously, shouldn’t you at least know geography to be elected president?

Asked by chyna (45071points) October 24th, 2019 from iPhone

Or shouldn’t you be at least as smart as a 5th grader?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

123 Answers

rebbel's avatar

And what was maybe as disturbing as the remark itself, was the audience behind him, cheering the idea….
Right now it seems like if he would shout random words, in a random order, whole chunks of his following would still cheer for it.

chyna's avatar

I know! Are these people real or paid to cheer at anything trump says?

elbanditoroso's avatar

Look at Senator Patrick Leahy’s sharpie-enhanced map of the US—do a search for it and laugh.

jca2's avatar

It’s just mind boggling how people can still defend him.

filmfann's avatar

Are you questioning his superior and unmatched wisdom?

Darth_Algar's avatar

Yeah, but Colorado was once part of Mexico, so he wasn’t really wrong.

LostInParadise's avatar

If you have seen one Western state, you have seen them all. New Mexico, Arizona, Colorado. Do we really need to split hairs?

elbanditoroso's avatar

@LostInParadise I hope you’re kidding.

And you left out Utah and Wyoming.

And the terrain in Utah and Colorado is hugely different from Arizona and New Mexico.

LostInParadise's avatar

I am just trying to imagine Trump’s thought process

ucme's avatar

Being in Colorado, I guess the wall will be built from Boulders…hahahahahaha <hiccup>

seawulf575's avatar

Well, we elected Obama after he said he had visited 57 states and had a couple yet to go. So I guess geography or being smarter than a 5th grader isn’t part of the job requirement.

Darth_Algar's avatar

The difference is Obama misspoke, akin to a typographical error, in an off-the-cuff remark after a long, exhausting day of campaigning. Trump’s was in a planned, prepared speech. And Obama didn’t later try to justify the error in a rambling, incoherent post in which he stated that he spoke as intended but that it was a joke.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

I am at a lost how you defend the Don Father so well @seawulf575 and gaff after gaff,after gaff if you want to call them that and all you can still come up with is the misspoken number of states Obama said after an exhausting day.

Airports in 1776, yeah well Obama said there was 57 states.
Hurricane hitting Alabama,yeah well Obama said there was 57 states.
Build a wall around Colorado , yeah well Obama said there was 57 states.
Your dedication to the great orange one is amazing.
I guess you believe it was Ukraine that interfered in the 2016 election not Russia.
And yeah,yeah I know Obama said there was 57 states.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 What was the original question? Oh yeah…“Should you at least know geography to be elected president?” And @Darth_Algar This applies to you as well. You want to rant because Trump had a gaffe with geography, but you want to ignore it when it was Obama. That is called either hypocrisy or derangement. You choose.

chyna's avatar

@seawulf575 If it was trumps only gaffe, or only one of a very few, then people would let it go. But he says something really stupid or incomprehensible every single day.

LadyMarissa's avatar

Yes, I do. I also think that you should be able to understand the Constitution as well!!!

seawulf575's avatar

@LadyMarissa Again…we elected Obama who violated the Constitution repeatedly. So either he didn’t understand it or he was willfully doing it. And either way, he did it with the entire DNC as accomplices. Meanwhile…when did Trump violate the Constitution?

seawulf575's avatar

@chyna No, this wasn’t Trump’s only gaffe. I have already stated that in other threads. But no, he doesn’t say stupid things every day. AND, we still have Joe Biden in the hunt for the DNC nomination for POTUS. And Joe can’t make it through a day without saying something stupid, racist, misogynistic, and/or getting creepy. Yet you folks on the left seem to want to make excuses for him. So why is it that you don’t want to hold all presidential candidates to the same standard?

chyna's avatar

@seawulf575 So “grabbing women by the pussy” isn’t creepy?

ucme's avatar

Yucky poo pie, every time I hear “grabbing by the pussy” it makes my skin crawl.
I mean grab!?!
Touch…yes.
Caress…absolutely.
Grab though…behave yourself!

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Nobody ignored Obama’s slip of 57 states but everyone except you haters realized it was a slip of the tung after aa exhausting day ,not a planned speech by a stable genius.
Who seems to have quite a few gaffes maybe not every day but close to it.
You seem willing to easily forgive the fact that there were no airports in 1776 that was just a little gaffe.
And as @chyna pointed grabbing women by the pussy is ultra creepy, and your ignoring that as well.
If Obama had said anything near that you would have strung him up on your burning cross.
How come someone who is such a stable genius has so many gaffes?

Sagacious's avatar

No. It’s not required.

seawulf575's avatar

@chyna creepy might fit, tacky is definitive. Now, let’s compare that statement with these actual events:

https://thepoliticalinsider.com/joe-biden-creep/

None of those are creepy, @chyna?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Not one of us has given ole Joe a pass.
He seems as sleazy as ole orange hair himself.

seawulf575's avatar

And yet none of you go off on him. It’s only when someone brings him up and forces the discussion. Other than that, it’s crickets. And the same goes for any of the Dem candidates.

ucme's avatar

@seawulf575 You only have to read “not one of us to know the mentality of these tedious bores, save your energy man.
Kind of people who suck the life out of a room when they waddle in.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Trump, is a collective, of his upbringing. His behavior is a result of that. He doesn’t know what he’s doing as POTUS. The congress , and house of Representatives, are supposed to keep him in check. He acts like a tyrant though.
His will, will be forced upon him.
Whether he likes it, or not. The GOP, should be ashamed of itself…

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: The difference between your comparison of Trump and Biden is that Trump is President, Biden is a candidate.

The difference between your comparison of Trump and Obama is Trump has made many many errors regarding so many different topics. Obama, you have one example in your arsenal, the one about 57 states.

It’s apples to oranges.

LostInParadise's avatar

The most annoying thing about Trump’s errors are that he never acknowledges that he made a mistake. It is always some sort of strange joke. He thinks it is a sign of weakness to ever say that he made a mistake, when in fact his current approach makes him appear to be an even bigger jerk.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

That is just it, Trump won’t or can’t admit when he made a mistake or lied learn from it and move on,he always doubles down and pushes his lie that it wasn’t a lie and we should believe it.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Well. That’s one thing that is true. Trump’s always “all in.” I’d love to play Texas hold ‘em (poker,) with him. Get me some money….

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 So apparently you don’t care if Biden is exactly like Trump or worse because he’s only running for the job. Got it. Sooooo…..if he is elected, will you then go on about what an idiot he is?
As for Obama, I gave one example. I could give more. There was the time he referred to Hawaii as Asia, the time he was giving recognition to a Navy corpsman and he pronounced it as “Corpse Man”...obviously not understanding the “ps” is silent. Basic English exceeded his abilities. Let’s not forget “The Middle East is obviously an issue that has plagued the region for centuries.”.
Or
“No, no…I have been practicing…I bowled a 129. It’s like—it was like Special Olympics, or something.”
or
“Let me be absolutely clear. Israel is a strong friend of Israel’s. It will be a strong friend of Israel’s under a McCain…administration. It will be a strong friend of Israel’s under an Obama administration. So that policy is not going to change.”

The list goes on and on. But I find it telling that you don’t care to see if I am right or not when I say things like all politicians say stupid things. What it tells me is that you don’t WANT to know the truth.

seawulf575's avatar

Thanks, @ucme. I need to be reminded of how lost many are.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Obama would know that Hawaii is not in Asia since he was born there, right?

Obama was probably traveling a lot at the time and was mistaken about his location.

View the video here: He says “here in Asia.” Not “Hawaii is part of Asia.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LBGRiB4PEjk&t=35m17s

MrGrimm888's avatar

@seawulf575 . In your opinion, how is Biden worse than Trump? Is it character issues, or policy? As I’ve said, I think Biden should be removed from candidacy. But, I have my own opinions about this. I’m curious about your thoughts on Biden….

As far as being lost. I think America, is pretty lost, currently. Left, and right. I won’t comment on centrists. Because I don’t understand why there would be ANY currently. 9/11 brought the country together, and I thought we were going to be stronger, as a whole. But the opposite happened.
WTF?

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 One would think he knew Hawaii was part of the USA and not part of Asia. By the way…when he made that speech, he was in Hawaii so saying “here in Asia” is the exact same thing as saying “Hawaii is part of Asia”. But you see what you did, right? You made excuses for him. Apply that same excuse to Trump. He has been dealing with a lot and was probably tired when he went to give that speech so he misspoke and said Colorado. This is what I have been saying: the left makes excuses for Dems that commit the exact same infractions as Trump.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Since Obama was born in Hawaii, you don’t think he knows Hawaii is in the US? You think he thinks he was born in Asia?

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 I don’t know that Biden is better or worse than Trump. He creeps me out more, and I think he is a flaming idiot that has never had an original thought of his own, but that is my opinion. My opinion of Biden is just that…my opinion. The point I was making is that you folks on the left are going hermatile on every little thing about Trump and yet are entirely ignoring the exact same things out of Dems. Look at the entire impeachment inquiry as the perfect example. The Dems (and you folks on the left supporting them blindly) believe that somehow Trump used coercion to influence a foreign government to do his bidding. There is no proof of this, yet we are once again wasting tons of time, effort, and money “investigating” it. Yet by Biden’s own words, he, as Vice President, used coercion on the exact same government…committing the exact crime for which you are going crazy about Trump supposedly doing. And what is the response? “He isn’t POTUS” “He’s only a candidate”, “You should leave Biden alone”...the excuses are legion. And it isn’t just Biden that gets these passes. Adam Schiff made a big production about a whistleblower accusing Trump of the aforementioned coercion. He told the world he didn’t know who the whistleblower was and that he had no contact with him. Then it comes out that the Whistleblower admits to going to Schiff’s staff prior to ever writing the complaint. So Schiff flat out lied about the whole thing. Yet what is the reaction from the left? Crickets, at best. Justification and deflection are more usual.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Thank you for your opinion.
I disagree with some of it, but like I said, Biden should be removed from candidacy.

Again. I am not on the left. I am currently anti-republican. But I have almost no respect for the dems. Please stop referring to me, as the left. It bothers me. As I don’t condone their behavior either.
You can do what you want. I’m a former bouncer, so I have been called worse. But please don’t just lump me in, with the left. I’m not a voter, by choice. I condemn the entire system. Take that, as you will….

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@seawulf575 You want us to scream and shout at how sleazy Biden is, all of us have said if guilty of an abuse of power he should pay, his unwanted touching is creepy we admit that as well.
You want us to scream at how much a scum ball he is, sorta what you do with Trump?
I see you defending Trump more than shouting down at him for his many gaffes.
I see Trump’s sons on tv bad mouthing Biden’s son at what an out rage he is getting a job with little to no experience just with his dad’s name.
WOW? really maybe they should turn the camera around as well.
Think Ivanka would have her position if dear ole Dad wasn’t President?

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 yes, I do want just that. Isn’t it what you do about Trump 100% of the time? If you find offense with a specific action, you should hold that same standard to all. I like logic and facts. When people don’t use them or use innuendo it bothers me. And I don’t care what end of the political spectrum they are on. I was listening to talk radio today…a conservative host. He was going on about the Russia investigation being turned into a criminal investigation. Wonderful…but it means nothing. We don’t know anything about why it was changed to that, we don’t know what they are looking at or who, we don’t know anything. So to try making something big out of it is silly.
But that is me…I hold that same standard to everyone. It seems like most of the liberal jellies on these pages are rabid about anything and everything Trump says or does. “He LIES!” But they say nothing about the lies from the media or from the Dem politicians. “He’s an IDIOT! He just said he was building a wall around Colorado!!!” But when you point out the endless gaffes from Dems, you all seem to want to make excuses or ignore them. If you are upset about lies or gaffes, you should hold that same standard to everyone. If lying is bad enough to warrant the vitriol that pours out against Trump, you ought to have that same reaction to all liars.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^I call bullshit. You would clearly be against Obama, or Hillary, if such things were reveled…..

Demosthenes's avatar

I would love an intellectual as president because I’m a bit of an elitist who isn’t interested in an “every man” leader (not that a billionaire from New York is an “every man” but that’s how he portrays himself and how many of his supporters view him). That said, anyone can slip up, though some seem to do it more than others. Mostly I just feel embarrassed for them when they do rather than angry about it. One thing that bothers me about Trump is how inarticulate he is. It’s painful to listen to sometimes. Command of language is something I value in a president. It’s not at the very top of the list, but it’s on there.

Anyway, continue arguing. I’m just passing through…

SQUEEKY2's avatar

But when you point out the endless gaffes from Dems, you all seem to want to make excuses or ignore them. If you are upset about lies or gaffes, you should hold that same standard to everyone.
Isn’t that the exact same thing you do for the Don Father?

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 If you ever notice, when I point out the gaffes from the Dems, I am doing it to point out the contrary reaction between when they make a gaffe and when Trump does. I don’t come out and start the conversation with “Did you hear what Biden said today?!?!? He said poor kids are as smart as white kids!” But I might bring that comment out when you are all piling on for something you believe Trump said that was racist. I do it to point out that you really don’t care about racism. If you did, you would be calling Biden out on his gaffes as well.
What you all miss is that what you call me defending Trump is actually me calling for rational thought. I have commented on his foolish comments. I have stated his incessant Tweeting is childish. But I don’t get wrapped around the axle of hatred with every little thing.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Perhaps you missed my question above yours. You were typing as I was typing. I said “Since Obama was born in Hawaii, you don’t think he knows Hawaii is in the US? You think he thinks he was born in Asia?”

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 I absolutely believe he knows HI is part of the USA. I also suspect he knew he wasn’t in Asia. But the point is that he said it. It was a gaffe. Waaahhh. It is meaningless. But if we are going to point out how idiotic Trump is for every gaffe, then apparently I have the wrong opinion of gaffes and we should hold all our leaders or wanna-be leaders to the same standard. Obama made many, many gaffes. Biden has made many, many more. When you spend your life with a microphone catching your every word, you will eventually say something that is idiotic. But if we want to make it a criminal offense, the law should be applied uniformly.

jca2's avatar

Nobody’s making Trump’s gaffe a criminal offense, @seawulf575, but the silly things said by Obama are way, way outnumbered by the silly things said by Trump.

seawulf575's avatar

And here he is when his teleprompter fails

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=24vRyrjiD2Q

jca2's avatar

Lawdy be, God help him, @seawulf575.

seawulf575's avatar

Again…the point is not that Trump is brilliant and Obama’s a fool, it’s not that one is better than the other. It’s how WE approach what is commonplace in politics that makes the divisions.

chyna's avatar

No @seawulf575 the real point is that trump is the most disrespectful man I have ever heard speak. He doesn’t know how to be kind or respectful to anyone. Gaffe’s aren’t the issue. trump can’t admit he is wrong. Ever.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

That was extremely well said @chyna and that is the true point!^^^
He mocks crippled people,admires dictators,looks down at poor people,doesn’t have a diplomatic bone in his body.
Would throw absolutely anyone under the bus to save himself, makes me super glad I am NOT an American.

LadyMarissa's avatar

I didn’t like trump back when he claimed he was a Dem voting for Hillary. He knew the Dems wouldn’t run him for their candidate, so he quickly switched to the party that would!!! I don’t like ANY of the candidates that the Dems have running right now. The ONLY thing that I know for sure is that I WILL vote for whoever they decide to run…UNLESS it’s Hillary…& she’s looking better & better every day that passes!!!

MrGrimm888's avatar

Again. Voting for the lesser of two evils, is NOT a democracy…

seawulf575's avatar

@chyna let me ask something: When have you ever heard Hillary admit she was wrong about anything? I mean, if you are going to say you hate Trump for that reason, do you also hate Hillary? She’s every bit as arrogant, has made her share of gaffes and has never admitted any fault for anything. Don’t you hate her too?
The point is not that Trump is perfect or that I am deflecting. I am pointing out that all the things you folks on the left rage about with Trump are done by those in the Dem ranks as well. It’s a politician thing. But in my mind, if you are going to hold one to a certain standard, you really need to look at all of them with that same set of glasses.

LadyMarissa's avatar

@MrGrimm888 Then we haven’t had a democracy for well over 20 years!!!

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@seawulf575 You want us to rant about the faults of Hilary, Biden, and even Bill Clinton and you want us scream about them as much about their faults as we do about Trumps.

Everyone here has admitted that Biden should be charged if guilty of a crime, same for Hilary, and Bill has little to no morals due to a certain BJ from a intern.
and I think we all did rant on them about the same as you did for ole Orange top.
You keep saying a double standard, Obama was screamed at for spending a dime on anything even debt payments you (the conservatives) added that as well to his wild spending spree.
Yet not a peep out of conservatives about the Don Fathers spending, in fact ole Mitch MicConnell said it wasn’t Trump’s tax cuts for the rich, it was Medicaid,Medicare, and social security running the the US debt out of control, another point at it’s all the poor peoples fault.
We will rant on the faults of a democrat as nasty as you do about Trumps faults,lack of diplomacy,many many lies, and countless gaffes.

Darth_Algar's avatar

BTW: There is, of course, a difference between physical geography, political administration and culture. Hawaii is a US state, yes, but it isn’t part of America. Granted it’s not geographically connected to Asia, but historically it has much stronger cultural ties to Asia than it does to America.

Sorta like how Curacao is a part of the Netherlands, but it’s not European.

seawulf575's avatar

@Darth_Algar but if you were born in HI, wouldn’t you know the difference?

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 No, you don’t all go as nuts over the other liars as you do Trump. You don’t go after the other gaffers as much as you do Trump. And many of them want to be POTUS. Did you scream about Hillary not admitting she was wrong when she was running for POTUS? No. Have you commented on what a liar she is every time she says something? No you haven’t. Yet she lies about every time she opens her mouth. Yes, you have said that if they are found guilty of a crime they should be punished, but do you give that same latitude to Trump? Or do you convict him and then hope it comes true?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

You missed what I said we went as nuts over them as you do for your orange guy.
If they lie NO matter who it is should be called out for it.
One thing I haven’t seen but if it has happened I have no doubt you will link it for me,is mocking people like Trump does and has done,the mocking of the handicapped journalist was truly disgusting, his grabbing women by the pussy was disgusting again, he mocked Hunter Biden at one of his rallies, what did that guy do besides get a job on his Dad’s name?
I haven’t noticed gaffes by the others as much as Trump, but if they are as far out as airports in 1776 I will call them down for it.
Oh and if Hunter was wrong for getting the job on his dad’s name, then you better look at Ivanka,Don jr, and Erick,as well because if it wasn’t for their dad they sure wouldn’t be there.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 The issue with Hunter Biden is not that he got a job on his Daddy’s name. It’s that he got a job that he wasn’t qualified for in a huge position of authority…on his daddy’s name. Not once, but twice. That is a big red flag that there was influence peddling going on. Combine that with timing of things that Joe Biden did and Hunter Biden benefited from and it looks highly suspicious.
But this just highlights exactly what I have been saying. You can’t even articulate what the problem is involving Biden. If these things happened with Trump, you would be able to. There would be multiple investigations going on into them, it would be 24/7 stories on CNN and MSNBC, and there would be protests from here to Timbuktu for Trump to be impeached or imprisoned. And rightfully so. Yet when it is Biden, it is downplayed significantly. Kamala Harris even says we need to leave Joe Biden alone.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Well. Trump.wasn’t remotely qualified for POTUS, either. Do you see the desparity, or similarities?
And Ivanka, is a purse designer…

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Ivanka, Jared, the other one or two (the two young men look almost identical LOL), all being Trump’s relatives, you don’t think those are positions of authority on Daddy’s name, or Daddy-in-law?

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , There is no evidence tying Hunter Biden’s position with Joe Biden’s efforts to dismiss the Ukrainian prosecutor. Our European allies were all in agreement that the prosecutor was not doing his job. It is an impeachable offense to use tax payer money to force the Ukrainian president to press charges against a potential presidential nominee. Maybe there is some corruption involving hiring Hunter Biden to cash in on the family name. So what? No evidence whatsoever that Joe Biden did anything illegal.

chyna's avatar

So the spoiled first daughter wants to have an anniversary party for her and hubs Jared at camp David. This is your tax dollars at work. What I find ridiculous about this, is trump wanted to hold the Summit at his hotel in Florida because of all the beautiful amenities it has. Why didn’t the first daughter choose her father’s hotel if it is so beautiful? Again, it’s a waste of taxpayer dollars.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@seawulf575 So your upset that Hunter got a job on his Dad’s name for a job he wasn’t qualified for?
That had a ton of authority with it?
How come you don’t mention Ivanka for the same thing?

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise That wasn’t the only interaction Joe Biden had that was coincidental with Hunter’s “jobs”.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/politics/biden-outreach-to-dhs-and-doj-overlapped-with-work-by-son-hunters-lobbying-firm

https://www.breitbart.com/2020-election/2019/09/29/five-times-hunter-bidens-business-dealings-presented-conflict-interest-joe-biden/

What we are seeing is a lot of overlap between Biden taking action and Hunter gaining profit. If it were to come out as what it looks like, that is called influence peddling and is illegal. I’m actually amazed the MSM tried using Ukraine to burn Trump since it opens the door wide to look at the sketchy stuff Biden has done. But here’s the kicker: There has never been an honest investigation into any of these things. A lot of this falls into the black hole of the Obama Adminstration that violated the law at will and had a corrupt DoJ and intelligence communities that let it happen.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 There are a couple differences between Hunter and Ivanka or Donald Jr. They actually have marketable skills whereas Hunter didn’t. Hunter had a negative discharge from the military for drugs which Ivanka and Donald Jr. don’t. That isn’t saying they don’t do drugs, but that sort of mark on your past will definitely close many doors for you. Unless you have someone opening them up again. In both Ukraine and China, Hunter Biden, with his checkered past and with no knowledge or experience of operating on a board of directors or in the energy field, was given a board post. Why and how? If it weren’t for JOE Biden being in he equation, he wouldn’t have been allowed to enter the building. We all know Ukraine was and probably still is corrupt so it’s a cinch they were looking for political pull. And China has always found ways to backdoor deals and pulling the son of the US VP into a business deal would be a great way to get something they couldn’t otherwise have gotten. None of this applies to the Trump kids. Do they benefit from the Trump name? Sure…but they would do that if Donald wasn’t the POTUS. Has Trump purposely made deals as POTUS just so they could benefit? Nope…not that I know of.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: If you google Donald Trump Jr. and Kushner, you will find that they’re no angels. Furthermore, they’ve never been in the military so how could they have gotten a negative discharge from the military, the way Biden did, if they were not in the military ever? That would be like me saying look, you’ve gotten a speeding ticket, I never got a speeding ticket. However, I’ve never had a driver’s license. (Just an example, as I have a license). So I’m a way better driver than you, because you’ve committed a driving infraction and I never have.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Ivanka had a fashion a business , so I guess that makes her qualified for the position she is in.
You scream double standards but refuse to look at your side about anything except the crazy gaffes.
You scream corrupt but Trumps entire inner circle has fallen,been brought up on charges or resigned and yet you keep screaming the Dems are the ones that are corrupt, you say Obama broke the law continuously but was never brought up on charges I think the conservatives would have nailed him to the cross if he had done half of what you accuse him of.
WE here have repeatedly said if Biden is guilty of a crime he should pay, but that isn’t good enough, we are not going to execute him so what more do you want?

MrGrimm888's avatar

Trump.himself, was a draft dodger. It’s impossible to hypothesize, whether he would have been a hero, or been dishonorably discharged. I consider this, a false analogy.

But the wulf is correct. A DD, is a really bad mark, on one’s reputation….

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 No one is an angel….that is a given. As for Trump or Jr serving in the military, that also is true. It is a sad fact that one does not have to have served in the military to be the Commander-in-Chief. But not having the chance to get a military discharge is not the point. Getting a dishonorable discharge or a less-than-honorable discharge is a huge black mark. Let’s put it this way….Trump and Jr have had the opportunity to be drug addicts, but never got arrested for it. Hunter Biden did get arrested for it. That’s why he was discharged. And when you are applying for a job, if you lie about a DD, you could be fired. And generally, companies will not consider bringing in someone to sit on their Board of Directors that has no experience in their business, no experience serving on a Board, and has a DD from the military. That just doesn’t happen…unless that person brings something of real value to the table. So in this case, what would that be?

LostInParadise's avatar

It could very well be that what Hunter Biden had to offer was his family name. This may be a form of corruption, but it relates to Hunter Biden, not Joe Biden. The relevance to the 2020 election is nil.

What qualifications does Jared Kushner have to write a Middle East peace plan? Putting him in charge of that is at best a laughable distraction and at worst a detriment to national foreign policy.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^Good points. But none of our “conventional” methods, have worked any better.
The ME, is nothing like the western way of doing things…

IMO.We should abandon the entire area. It’s clear that democracy, won’t work. It’s clear, that US involvement, doesn’t make any difference…Except for making a bad situation worse.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise Having a family name that is respected is not a bad thing. Getting a job based on family name is not a bad thing. When that family name is currently filling the second highest position in our nation and the job is with foreign companies? That is suddenly very problematic. I’ve already posted citations that show Biden was stepping in to push official policy in a direction to help Hunter. So that DOES relate to Biden and the relevance to the 2020 election is solid.
As for Jared Kushner working in the ME, you have a grossly bad assumption going on. He will not be working in a vacuum. Any treaties he hammers out still have to be approved and signed off on by not only the WH, but congress as well. So at worst, he doesn’t get anything reasonable and we are no worse off. At best, he manages to find some peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

LostInParadise's avatar

There is nothing inherently wrong if both Hunter and Joe Biden support the same legislation. It is a bit of a stretch to say that Joe was pushing legislation in order to help Hunter’s lobbying effort.

There has to be someone more qualified than Jared Kushner to come up with a ME peace plan. Putting him in charge is a waste of time.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise did you read the articles I cited earlier in this thread? Supporting the same legislation? How about Hunter starts getting involved with some obscure legislation and then daddy, amazingly, finds intense interest in that same obscure legislation? How about Hunter gets a job in China and then daddy intercedes to broker a deal of a desired US business to China…which the company Hunter is working for benefits from. Sorry…coincidence is one thing, but it just gets stretched pretty thin as an excuse.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

Good Lord 2 extreme right wing news sources ,and what you just described to @LostInParadise is pure speculation.

seawulf575's avatar

And there it is…the deflection. Attack the source instead of the content. Discount it without daring to actually read it. Here’s a clue, @SQUEEKY2, if you want to find an actual new report that doesn’t polish up a Dem, you can’t go to liberal sites.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

And you can’t go to fright wing sites if you want the truth on Republicans.

MrGrimm888's avatar

Biden essentially admitted his acts, on YouTube. That’s a confession, to me.

Trump is guilty of the same charge.

I don’t see a difference. Other than Trump obstrusting, the legal process.

They were clearly extorting Ukraine. And putting lives in jeopardy…

The punishment, should similar, in both cases….

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 that is true which is why I go to many different sites. What I try to avoid is the articles that are passing innuendo as fact or trying to sensationalize things just to slant the article.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: You think of Breitbart as a legitimate news site?

MrGrimm888's avatar

I judge Trump, by what literally comes right from his lips. Not by any media.

Biden basically confessed, to a similar crime. Again, by his own words.

Trump is refusing to take part in his own investigation. Parts of the GOP, are following suit. All involved, should be punished. IMO. And both acts, are something that I don’t think that the POTUS should be doing. As far as I’m concerned, they both committed extortion, and should face the penalties. And they both put thousands of lives, in jeopardy.
It’s really worse than that. If Russia took the Ukraine, who was next? IMO, they both put the lives of eastern Europe, in jeopardy. And it was a reckless, selfish act, in both cases. And neither had the backing of the US, to do so. I find it an impeachable act for Trump, and a disqualification for Biden. Letting eitheroff of the hook, sets a dangerous presidence. I feel that they should both be punished, to the maximum extent of the law. Whatever that is, in this case.

I realize that other people in power, have done similar things. But I find that behavior abhorrent, and unbecoming, of any country’s leader. It should not be tolerated. Period.

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , Nobody is investigating the charges you brought up. If they are so flagrant, why is Trump and DOJ not mentioning them? Instead Trump is making up charges for which there is no evidence and used taxpayer money to force a foreign leader to support his re-election, which is of course an impeachable offense.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise Gee…let’s think about that. When Trump mentioned it, you idiots on the left went crazy saying he was targeting a political opponent. You didn’t care if Biden did these horrendous things, just that Trump might actually look into it.
You blather on about no evidence and how that is a waste taxpayer money. Yet you supported the entire Russia Collusion investigation and there was no evidence of that. This deal with Biden has evidence. It has Joe Biden, in public, bragging about his coercion. There is your quid pro quo….your evidence. Why are you so against looking into it? There is evidence, there is a lot of heavy circumstantial evidence as well as a taped confession. Why would that be wrong to look into? Why is it that when Trump tries, you support an impeachment effort against him for it?

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 are you debating the content of the article?

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: I wouldn’t trust any article from Breitbart as being factual.

I also don’t think it’s necessary that you say “idiots on the left.” Name calling is second grade stuff, and even now in elementary school they teach the kids not to talk like that.

MrGrimm888's avatar

To be fair. Anti-Trumpers, insult Trump supporters all the time. I know I do… Let the wulf say what he feels. He’s teaching us about Trumpers.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 So what you did was to discount an article without even reading it, because of your political bias. So when you do that you eliminate any ability to honestly debate things. You are sealing yourself off behind your political bias. That is called ignorance where I come from. If you read the article and didn’t like it because you found it full of supposition or innuendo or even outright lies (not what you think are lies but actual lies), then we are in a position where we can discuss it and we can reach some understanding of where it uses political bias instead of facts and maybe we can get to the truth of the matter. If you ever notice, when someone gives a citation from a ultra-left outlet, I actually read it and will say it is biased and say why I see that bias. I don’t just discount it out of hand because I don’t like the source.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^You make a good point. But Breitbart, is an exceptionally bad source. For anything…I’m trying to think of a leftist comparison, but I can’t think of one, that is that extreme. Not, with as many followers…

Limbaugh, is another radical liar, with lots of following. I’ve tried to listen to him multiple times. Just to get a different opinion, but I can’t tolerate him, for more than few minutes. He’s a putrid example of the alt-right.

I am sure that there are leftist examples. But they don’t have the amount of followers… For whatever reason.

Fox news, is prettybad. But evendors they call Trump out, sometimes…

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , Let me try one more time. You linked to two articles bringing up charges against Biden unrelated to the Ukraine. Do you have a link of Trump or any other government official referring to these specific charges? If not, then these charges are either not very damning or very credible or else Trump and the DOJ are really stupid in not using them.

As to the Mueller investigation, the primary purpose was to determine the extent to which the Russians interfered with the 2016 election. This was uncovered. There is no question that the Russians tried to get voters to go for Trump. You may not feel the interference was significant, but a lot of people feel that the use of Facebook to target articles to voters played a significant role in the election.

Why in the world would Biden call attention to himself by bragging about getting rid of the Ukrainian prosecutor, if he did it to protect Hunter? The problem with the prosecutor is that he did not prosecute, Hunter of anyone else. Our European allies all concurred. Are they also corrupt?

The reports coming out of the impeachment inquiry say that several federal officials agreed that Trump was using federal funds to force Zelensky to interfere with the upcoming elsection by investigating the Bidens. There will almost certainly be an impeachment, and McConnell said that he would permit a trial in the Senate. If the charges hold up then I think you will agree that Trump would have to be removed from office.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: To me, an honest debate would be a legitimate, conventional news source. NY Times, Washington Post, Newsweek, Forbes (for financial stuff), Wall St. Journal. Nothing far right and nothing far left, either. I’m not saying I want Mother Jones. I’m saying a conventional news source.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 NYT, WaPo, Newsweek are definitely left wing. Look at all the lies and bogus reports they have pushed over the past couple years. There was a time that they were actually respectable but those days are long gone. To say they are legitimate, conventional news sources shows how biased you really are. Time to do a little self reflection.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise To start with, I was pointing out how Biden had done many shady things that seem to point towards him helping Hunter. You assumed this was only the Ukraine thing. I pointed out there were others and gave the citations as points of explanation. THAT is how these other things got brought into the discussion. Since that point you have tried to avoid them. Why? And why isn’t Trump bringing any of this to light? Well again…gee…let’s see. When he even mentions doing an investigation into Biden’s issues, the left goes crazy and tries using it as a basis for impeachment. Guiliani was also digging into these things to see if there was something worth looking at and what happened there? The left went crazy trying to implicate him in some sort of crime. So when the left takes such radical action to stop any investigations into Biden from ever starting, you don’t get to use the excuse that no investigations have been done. You might want to ask why there is such adversity to doing an investigation. After all, isn’t that the excuse you have used for every idiotic investigation into Trump? There are allegations so they should be investigated. If he didn’t do anything then he has nothing to fear, right?
As for the Mueller investigation, you have the liberal talking point down perfectly. Do you have cheat cards that tell you what to write? The investigation was not to look into Russian interference….it was to look into collusion with Trump. Here is the initial letter from Rod Rosenstein assigning Mueller as the special prosecutor. Oh! and I used the NYT as a source so you can all stop crying about right wing media.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/05/17/us/politics/document-Robert-Mueller-Special-Counsel-Russia.html

Please note the assignments: He is to look into (a) any links and/or coordination between the Russian government and individuals associated with the campaign of President Donald Trump. That is the very first one. It doesn’t give a specific focus area of the Russian interference, though it mentions that in the overview. But the real focus…the MAIN focus…was to find a link between Russia and Trump. To claim anything else is ludicrous.

Biden bragging about using coercion shows he actually did what the Dems are trying to say Trump did and which is an impeachable offense. There was a definite Quid Pro Quo there. “If you don’t fire that prosecutor in the next 6 hours, you won’t get the billion dollars.” Can’t get much more plain than that. And Biden is bragging about it. And he wants to be POTUS. So if it is an impeachable offense, wouldn’t it make sense to investigate it now, before he gets any further into his campaign? If it is an impeachable offense, he should be banned from running. It also speaks to what he is willing to do on a whim. That should scare everyone.
As for the impeachment inquiry, here’s that part that smacks the loudest about that. It is a secret inquiry, It is being held in the SCIF room so that no one can see or hear what is said. So how do we know who said what? Because the Dems are leaking what they want people to hear. Sorry…that’s as biased as it gets. You say there are government officials that agree Trump was using federal funds to force Zelensky to interfere with the upcoming election. There are also government officials that say no such thing happened. And here’s the kicker: Zelenskyy says it never happened. Trump put a hold on military aid for a lot or reasons, but getting Zelenskyy to help interfere in the upcoming election wasn’t one of them. And Zelenskyy even says he didn’t even know the money was held up until well after the phone call. So as a Quid, it’s pretty lame. And just yesterday, Tim Morrison, the former WH adviser, testified that he heard nothing illegal about anything that was said on the phone call.
Here’s another thought: You try using the logic of Biden wouldn’t brag about coercing the Ukrainian government if it was to help Hunter. That is an opinion. But given that logic, why would Trump blatantly coerce Ukraine when he knows there are lots of people listening in, and then release the transcript of the conversation if he was actually coercing them? It makes no sense whatsoever. And be honest…nothing on that phone call was even vaguely illegal.
Time to admit that this is just another hyped up political game pushed by the Dems as a way of trying to overturn the last election.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: Well, since Breitbart is so far to the right, if you could show me some article about your topics that are in news sources that are not far to the right, that would give your debate some legitimacy.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 again…when you avoid reading a citation and discount all that is in it merely because you don’t like the source is ignorance.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

I did go back and read the Breitbart piece and all I found was right wing propaganda.
With words like purposely and such yup as much propaganda as anything you point out as left wing drivel.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 interesting. I went back to the Breitbart article to see where the word purposely was used. I did a word search. It isn’t in there. Want to help me out here?

MrGrimm888's avatar

@seawulf575 . Again. You are assuming that millions of people, are conspiring against Trump. I support the Biden story, because, as you said he bragged about it publicy.

Trump publicly asked for Russian hackers to dig up dirt on Hillary. What is the difference?

SQUEEKY2's avatar

@MrGrimm888 That is not what I am getting he wants to make this all about Biden and his son,and what Biden did in his mind was a quid,quo,pro.
Ok and if guilty then we all agreed Biden should pay for it.
BUT!!!! what @seawulf575 is ignoring and refusing to acknowledge at all that Trump did the same fucking thing,and Trump did it for a political advantage ,while Biden might have done to get rid of a corrupt Ukraine prosecutor and help his kid get a job,he didn’t do it for political advantage in the up coming election TRUMP did.
And if guilty BOTH MEN SHOULD PAY,but to our wulfie only Biden is guilty and Trump is innocent, and that is were I am lost.

MrGrimm888's avatar

^I get it. But that’s not how to get to the wulf. If there is a way…

jca2's avatar

It’s more ignorant to take a piece of propaganda as gospel, @seawulf575.

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 I don’t take anything as gospel, you should know that by now. But again…no one has really tried debating the information I provided. @SQUEEKY2 made a lame attempt at discounting it, but as you see, his effort wasn’t even close to being accurate. Yet you all jump right on discounting it because you don’t like the website it came from. What are you all afraid of?

seawulf575's avatar

@MrGrimm888 I’m not saying millions are conspiring, but there are a whole lot of people in different areas and they are all playing their parts. The Dems are trying to dig up any and all dirt they can, even if they have to make it up. And it appears to me that they ARE trying to create it. Look at this “whistleblower” complaint. At first it was sensationalized and was instantly grounds to start an “impeachment inquiry”. Of course that inquiry was nothing more than Dems trying to dig up dirt, create a narrative, and keep Repubs and even Trump’s attorneys out of the process. Then Trump did something they entirely did not expect: He quickly released the transcript of the phone call to the public. Suddenly their narrative was shot in the ass. Then it comes out that the “whistleblower” worked with Adam Schiff’s staff prior to writing the complaint. The “whistleblower” lied to the IG about that, though. When asked if he had contacted anyone else especially with the Dems, he said no. Then it comes out he did. The complaint itself was full of gross inaccuracies and was “hearsay” by the “whistleblower’s” own admission. Meanwhile Adam Schiff likewise lied about not having any contact with the “whistleblower” before he received the complaint. He was making allegations before the “whistleblower” came forward that were pretty much a word for word match with the complaint. And then the “whistleblower” states he contacted Schiff’s office and that confirms Schiff’s lied. So here we have Democrats demonstrated as lying and trying to manipulate the narrative in a concerted effort to create something that could be used against Trump.
Then we have the MSM. Again…we will stay in the theme of the Whistleblower claims. Most of the liberal outlets ran with the claims of the “whistleblower” as if they were gospel. They reported over and over that Trump asked 8 times for Zelenskyy to investigate Biden. They reported that Trump was trying to get Ukraine to interfere in the upcoming election. They immediately jumped on Trump getting a quid pro quo for military aid and his abuse of power and how that is impeachable. They did NOT report that the “whistleblower” actually didn’t hear anything on the phone call and was only reporting hearsay. Then out came the transcript for all to see. None of the outlets actually put forth a retraction that they had inaccurately reported that Trump asked 8 times for Zelenskyy to investigate Biden. They did NOT point out that Trump only mentioned Biden once in the conversation and it was more of an aside. What they did instead is tried saying that Trump said he needed a favor from Zelenskyy and that was to look into Biden. That was a flat out lie. The only favor mentioned was for them to look into any potential efforts to interfere in the 2016 election by their country or members of that country. Yet lying didn’t stop the liberal media because it helps support their created narrative. So here we have many of the liberal “news” outlets using lies and manipulation to gain control of the narrative to make Trump out to be some horrible slime ball. AND they are taking “leaks” from the Dems and running with them, never once asking the question of whether they are valid or not or what else was being said during the “secret” testimony these leaks are coming from. So we have the MSM working with the Dems to put out the narrative they want the public to hear.
How can any reasonable person NOT see this as conspiratorial? Regardless of how many people are involved, it is most certainly a concerted effort by many groups to overthrow a presidential election.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 I’m not missing anything. What I am seeing, though, is that Trump did NOT get a quid pro quo. You seem to believe that happened, but it didn’t. Biden admitted he did. He described it in detail. Trump asked Zelenskyy to look into corruption in his country, in particular where it impacted our country. Biden was just an example. That is a perfectly reasonable request from one head of state to another. There was no threat of withholding aid or anything like that. Yes, the MSM and the Dems try to say that because Trump held up some aid and then released it after the phone call that was the quid pro quo. But you ignore the fact that the only place that narrative comes from is the MSM and the Dems. Zelenskyy himself said he knew nothing about the aid being held up. He said himself that the conversation with Trump was pleasant and that he felt no pressure to do anything. Kinda hard to say there was a quid pro quo when the person supposedly being forced to do something knew nothing about it.
So the two cases are not the same at all. In one case you have Biden describing his quid pro quo, in the other you have only Trump’s political opponents and their propagandists saying he did one, ignoring the facts entirely to make that claim.

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , The scope of the Mueller investigation was left wide open. It certainly included investigation of the means the Russians used to promote Trump’s election.

The key thing that you are missing about the pressure Biden put on the Ukrainian prosecutor is that Biden was acting on orders from the Obama administration. Biden did not personally have authority to withhold funds. Vice presidents can’t do such things. Trump did have that authority and he exercised it.

When Trump is impeached and tried in the Senate, Trump and the Republicans will be given the opportunity to provide any evidence they have in their defense. There is no legal requirement that they be able to do that now, though they are of course free to go before the public to present such information.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise The Mueller investigation specifically pointed to looking at interaction between Russia and the Trump campaign….it was not just one of the things. It was the very first and primary focuses of the investigation as stated in the letter assigning Mueller as the special prosecutor. Can’t sugar coat it…it was a witch hunt.
As for Biden not having the power to do the coercion, you do understand what you are saying, right? You just implicated Obama in an impeachable offense as well. And Biden is a human…he has the right to not do something illegal…in fact he has the obligation as an elected official to not do something illegal. So not only do you NOT absolve Biden of wrongdoing, you implicate Obama as well. Good job.
As for the impeachment, here’s where your argument falls apart: The Republicans should be included in the entire inquiry, not censored at the whim of a Democrat that has proven he will lie and has tainted his position by working with the whistleblower prior to the complaint being filed. The Republicans are a part of the House of Representatives. To effectively exclude them from any participation and to hold the inquiry in secret, leaking only what you want released, the Democrats are making a mockery of what is an extremely important process. They are proving it is nothing but a political, partisan hack job.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: I’m not afraid of anything but you must admit Breitbart is far right wing. Can something far right be trusted? The same way you don’t trust NY Times or others that I have listed, you say are left wing, well, to me, Breitbart is the same way, except right wing.

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , You are missing the point. There is nothing wrong with a president withholding aid to further American foreign policy. What is illegal is to withhold aid to cajole a leader of a foreign country to interfere in a national election as a personal favor, which is what Trump is being accused of.

chyna's avatar

^Exactly

seawulf575's avatar

@jca2 Breitbart is right wing…no argument there. Can it be trusted? Sure…as much as most of the left wing outlets can be trusted. How many lies have WaPo or NYT published over the past 3 years? How many reports that presented innuendo as fact? How many times has CNN or MSNBC been caught pushing the liberal agenda? I don’t trust any of those outlets. However, I will look at them from time to time, especially if one is used as a citation. I will accept HuffPo or Salon or Vox as a citation, but will reserve judgement on how factual it is. When it is rife with “could mean” or “it is believed” or “an anonymous source” then I get highly suspicious. Those things allow me to then debate the legitimacy of that citation based on facts and bias slant. But to just say “it’s right wing so it’s bad” is completely ignorant. So far you haven’t once tried to debate the information in my citations so I am assuming you either never looked at it or you did look at it and can’t debate it.

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise I am not missing the point at all. President Trump withheld military aid to Ukraine for a couple reasons. He wanted to make sure their well documented corruption issues were resolved and he was trying to put pressure on other NATO allies to help out as well. There is indeed nothing wrong with that whatsoever. Yet according to the left the only reason he did it was to force Zelenskyy to interfere with our upcoming election. That is so bogus as to be ridiculous. You are missing the point entirely. There was nothing that said “do this or else”. There was a request for a favor of having Ukraine look into potential corruption that interfered with the 2016 election. And there is an on-going investigation into that right now so that is acceptable. Zelenskyy mentioned he didn’t like how all the stuff surrounding the last state prosecutor went down and how our US ambassador to Ukraine was to work with. Trump agreed and stated the ambassador was replaced with someone else and that all that other stuff needed to be looked into as well with the prosecutor and Biden. That isn’t even asking a favor, it is voicing an opinion in agreement with the one presented by the Ukrainian president. And you still refuse to acknowledge that Zelenskyy has entirely refuted the idea that Trump put any pressure on him at all and that he didn’t even know there was any hold on the military aid at the time of the phone call. All that, which is verifiable fact and not supposition or innuendo, points to the fact that the liberal narrative that Trump tried forcing some political interference into the 2020 election is a fairy tale. OH! and here’s one other thought: for that narrative to have any substance at all, it would require Biden to be the Democratic nominee, or at least have a walk away lead on all other candidates. That isn’t remotely close to being true either.

jca2's avatar

@seawulf575: I’m not the only Jelly on this thread that said Breitbart is a bad news source. I asked for some articles on the same topic from some sources that are more to the center and you did not provide any. You rail against the NY Times and probably wouldn’t trust an article from there, but yet you want me to trust Breitbart. What’s good for the goose should be good for the gander.

LostInParadise's avatar

@seawulf575 , Any links to that story about the U.S. ambassador to the Ukraine (other than Breitbart)? What you are saying is much different from what she is saying. She spoke of resisting the idea of withholding funds and of pressure from Giuliani to have her removed for that reason.

There is no rule that Biden has to be a near certain Democratic nominee. He is the front runner. That is more than enough to cry foul over Trump’s use of taxpayer money to force an investigation.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

So Trump is innocent because he didn’t get a quid quo pro, and Biden did?
So I guess if I attempt to rob a bank and don’t succeed, I didn’t rob the bank?
Trump got caught trying to do a quid, but seeing he didn’t succeed he is innocent?
Very strange world you conservatives live in.
You scoff at every left wing as you call them news outlet as propaganda, but expect us to lap up Breitbart as gospel?

seawulf575's avatar

@LostInParadise the part about the US ambassador was in the transcript of the phone call between Trump and Zelenskyy.
And you are correct…nothing says Biden has to be the candidate. But be honest…Biden isn’t the front runner by very much if at all. I actually think Warren is the front runner. And for Trump to try interfering in the election, he would basically have to try implicating several people…not just Biden. Again…as a strategy it is poor. And it makes the assumption that Trump would take illegal actions on a phone call that he knows is not secure and that he knows has many, many people listening and transcribing. That just isn’t realistic…none of the allegations from the left in this are realistic.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 Trump is innocent because he didn’t do anything wrong. It is the opinion of the left and the allegations they are trying to use as a basis for impeachment that he used political force…a quid pro quo…to get help from Ukraine to dig up dirt on a political opponent. The allegation from the whistleblower was wrong on every front….it was a piece of fiction. The transcript shows there was no quid pro quo. The fact that Zelenskyy disputes the idea that there was any pressure put on him at all supports the fact that the Dem’s allegations are bullshit.
You want a bank robbery corollary? Okay, it would look more like this: You walk into a bank and fill out a deposit slip. You take it to the teller. Someone else later tells the cops they saw you write a robbery note on that slip and give it to the teller. And the cops come and arrest you for attempted robbery. The fact that the person reporting it wasn’t in the bank is irrelevant. The fact that the teller tells the cops that you handed them a normal deposit slip is irrelevant. The cops are sure you tried robbing the bank. That is what is going on with Trump. But you are right…it is a very strange world we live in when crap like this is given any credibility at all.
And I don’t ask you to lap up Breitbart as gospel. But I do expect you to at least read the citation and discuss what it is you don’t like about the material in the article. This is the respect I give when someone gives a citation from a left wing outlet. So far you have shown you didn’t even read it but tried to bullshit me into thinking you did.

SQUEEKY2's avatar

I went back and reread that brietbart garbage and the word was “purportedly” not purposely sorry I was wrong and can admit it,something you frightwingers should work on.
And sorry these whistle blowers were in on the call especially that military guy,you know the one Fox shredded.
Not saying the dems are all goody goody, sleaze oozes from both sides,but your orange god is very sleazy and every news outlet except for your fright wing ones think he as guilty as shit as well,and if he is so innocent why not cooperate with the proceedings and when found innocent imagine the political clout that would carry?
Refusing to cooperate and telling all his fright wingers not to cooperate makes him look guilty as shit.
But I know you won’t look at it like that.

seawulf575's avatar

@SQUEEKY2 “Purportedly” appeared once and was used to identify a quote they credited to another source. It seems the appropriate word to use there.
The whistleblowers were not in on the phone call. The “military guy” was Alexander Vindman who is not a whistleblower. His claim was that some phrases were left out of the transcript. Specifically two things: one that Trump supposedly stated there were recordings of Biden discussing Ukrainian corruption and another of Zelenskyy bringing up Burisma. He says he recommended other changes that were made. So what his testimony seems to be (and this is hard to verify since it is only obtained for us through Democratic leak) is that he heard the call and thought there were a couple things on the call that others didn’t feel were there. The phone transcript is a combination of the notes and memories of several people that were on the call specifically to be able to transcribe it later. They get together later and write up their transcripts and then compare and revise as seem appropriate to ensure as accurate rendition. It doesn’t say if Vindman was one of these people or not. But in the end, the others appear to not have remembered anything like that. But let’s look at what he says was left out and let’s see how nefarious it is. Trump claimed there was a recording of Biden discussing Ukrainian corruption. There might be. So? Biden was the VP and the point man on Ukraine during the Obama administration. Given that Ukraine had a bad reputation for their corruption around the world, it is likely he was discussing it. As for other recordings, there is the YouTube video where Biden is bragging about his coercion. But just saying there was a recording means nothing. And Zelenskyy bringing up Burisma likewise is not nefarious. At that point in the phone call, they were talking about cleaning out the Ukrainian swamp. Burisma had been under investigation previously. That would fit into that conversation. Again…nothing nefarious. It is likely his testimony was “massaged” by whoever leaked it to the press to give it a more sinister note.
And here we go again with the “why not cooperate?” I can tell you several reasons and point to one liberal hypocrisy on this one. First, this entire inquiry is a scam from the start. It is being headed by a guy who has purposely misrepresented the transcript during questioning, who is a known anti-Trumper. It is being held in secret instead of in the open for the public to see and there is no reason for the secrecy. It is based on a whistleblower claim that was a work of fiction. It was full of complete lies and was based not on first hand information but on a compilation of “hearsay” reports. The whistleblower lied to the ICIG when asked if he had interactions with House Dems. He concealed that he had. Then it comes out he met with Adam Schiff’s staff before even writing the complaint. Meanwhile, Schiff is lying about not knowing who the whistleblower is and saying he never met with him. That last part is actually true, but is a misdirection. When his staff meets with the whistleblower, and Schiff makes claims about Trump’s phone call that are pretty much word for word from the whistleblower complaint before the complaint was written, it is pretty much a given he knew of the whistleblower and had likely worked with his staff to craft the complaint. Continuing, the inquiry is excluding Republicans pretty much entirely. It is being done without a formal impeachment inquiry vote in the House so that they don’t have to follow any rules.
So…given all this obvious partisan skulduggery by the Dems, why SHOULD Trump cooperate with this?
Now to the hypocrisy. I asked this in a different question: why is the left protecting Biden? Why are they fighting so hard against investigating him. He BRAGGED about his corruption…his quid pro quo. Yet they are fighting any investigation into it. They even used the hint of a suggestion of such an investigation as grounds for impeachment. They are attacking anyone that dares to look too closely at that. Why not just cooperate with the investigation? I mean, if he is really innocent, what does he have to fear? What do the Dems have to fear? And when found innocent imagine the political clout that would carry?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther