It appears the quid pro quo was for a meeting, not a demand for investigation. No wonder Schiff and Company wanted all of this behind closed doors for over a month.
Both. Pay attention.
Only one can be proven. Or is the TDS so strong that burden of proof just doesn’t matter anymore?
I think you mean that if trump didn't say "no aid money unless you investigate"? It's a stupid argument, since his actions were known to Ukraine soon enough and actions speak louder than words. It wasn't all on the same day, but over the course of a short window of a couple of months when this happened.
How is this material different than Biden's "no aid if you DON'T stop investigating"?
Biden actually said it, and they really did fire the investigator before they money was released? Just a guess.
There it is. The clockwork shill now admits quid pro quo is okay as long it's his side doing it. So why did Trump repeatedly scream "NO QUID PRO QUO!" for the last couple months?
There it is. The clockwork shill now admits quid pro quo is okay as long it's his side doing it. So why did Trump repeatedly scream "NO QUID PRO QUO!" for the last couple months?
The GOP is only left with the flimsy rationalization of "fighting corruption." Never mind it's a political opponent ahead of Trump in the polls! For which there is no evidence whatsoever of corruption.
It appears the quid pro quo was for a meeting, not a demand for investigation. No wonder Schiff and Company wanted all of this behind closed doors for over a month.
Both. Pay attention.
Only one can be proven. Or is the TDS so strong that burden of proof just doesn’t matter anymore?
I think you mean that if trump didn't say "no aid money unless you investigate"? It's a stupid argument, since his actions were known to Ukraine soon enough and actions speak louder than words. It wasn't all on the same day, but over the course of a short window of a couple of months when this happened.
How is this materially different than Biden's "no aid if you DON'T stop investigating"?
and as usual you misrepresent the US position in regard to Shokin. The new prosecutor actually progressed on the once dormant investigation into the CEO of Burisma. Don't let the facts bog you down though....
It appears the quid pro quo was for a meeting, not a demand for investigation. No wonder Schiff and Company wanted all of this behind closed doors for over a month.
Both. Pay attention.
Only one can be proven. Or is the TDS so strong that burden of proof just doesn’t matter anymore?
I think you mean that if trump didn't say "no aid money unless you investigate"? It's a stupid argument, since his actions were known to Ukraine soon enough and actions speak louder than words. It wasn't all on the same day, but over the course of a short window of a couple of months when this happened.
How is this materially different than Biden's "no aid if you DON'T stop investigating"?
That's not what Biden said. I'd watch the video again. Then after that, I'd look at the facts and circumstances around his comment.
It appears the quid pro quo was for a meeting, not a demand for investigation. No wonder Schiff and Company wanted all of this behind closed doors for over a month.
Both. Pay attention.
Only one can be proven. Or is the TDS so strong that burden of proof just doesn’t matter anymore?
I think you mean that if trump didn't say "no aid money unless you investigate"? It's a stupid argument, since his actions were known to Ukraine soon enough and actions speak louder than words. It wasn't all on the same day, but over the course of a short window of a couple of months when this happened.
How is this materially different than Biden's "no aid if you DON'T stop investigating"?
That's not what Biden said. I'd watch the video again. Then after that, I'd look at the facts and circumstances around his comment.
your opinion piece misrepresents when Biden made the request to Poroshenko pursuant to US, EU, IMF and Ukrainian anti-corruption advocate policy.
Actually the opinion piece links to the email exchange from 2016 that show Hunter Biden's name was invoked by Ukrainian officials as a reason why the State Department should help with ending the corruption probe.
Comments
And pressing. Hugely.
https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/11/05/uh-oh-hunter-bidens-name-pops-2016-state-dept-e-mails-discussing-end-burisma-corruption-probe/
Sounds like a credible witness.