30 Oct 19
@sleepyguy saidTrump as a truth seeker isn't a line any serious person is going to do anything but scoff at.
That's what I don't get. All this angst because Trump was seeking .... the truth?
Apparently THE TRUTH is now a "thing of value" which must be criminalized in order to protect corrupt Democrats.
30 Oct 19
@no1marauder saidAny politician in Washington being a truth seeker, a city that so happens to have the highest population of sociopaths in the country, isn't a line any serious person is going to do anything but scoff at.
Trump as a truth seeker isn't a line any serious person is going to do anything but scoff at.
30 Oct 19
@no1marauder saidBy "any serious person" you mean lefty partisan hacks, of course. What a limp dodge. What else was he seeking but truthful information, and how can that reasonably be construed as an illegal thing of value?
Trump as a truth seeker isn't a line any serious person is going to do anything but scoff at.
30 Oct 19
@sleepyguy saidOMG, you morons are starting to actually believe your own cover-up lying.
That's what I don't get. All this angst because Trump was seeking .... the truth?
Apparently THE TRUTH is now a "thing of value" which must be criminalized in order to protect corrupt Democrats.
30 Oct 19
@mott-the-hoople saidOMG - How dense are you?? Get you head out of FOX and friends and read!
if true...in your infinite wisdom... what difference would that make? Is burisma corruption out off bounds? just what?
Did this guy listen in on the phone call?
Who did he speak with?
These are questions that schitt would not allow answered...why is that?
30 Oct 19
@Sleepyguy
The movie ends with the twitching convict hunched down in a darkened cell whispering hoarsely, "All I ever wanted was... the truth."
30 Oct 19
@sleepyguy saidA "thing of value" isn't intrinsically illegal, but solicitation of a thing of value from a foreign government to aid a US election campaign is.
By "any serious person" you mean lefty partisan hacks, of course. What a limp dodge. What else was he seeking but truthful information, and how can that reasonably be construed as an illegal thing of value?
Trump couldn't have cared less about the truth or falsity of any such information, but it is legally irrelevant whether he was just engaging in a quest for the Eternal Truth or not.
30 Oct 19
@no1marauder saidCommon sense dictates that seeking information cannot be against the law.
A "thing of value" isn't intrinsically illegal, but solicitation of a thing of value from a foreign government to aid a US election campaign is.
Trump couldn't have cared less about the truth or falsity of any such information, but it is legally irrelevant whether he was just engaging in a quest for the Eternal Truth or not.
- Joined
- 05 Nov 06
- Moves
- 147482
30 Oct 19
@no1marauder
"A "thing of value" isn't intrinsically illegal, but solicitation of a thing of value from a foreign government to aid a US election campaign is. '
So when the Duram report comes out the dems are fuked?
30 Oct 19
@sleepyguy said"Common sense" should tell you that information detrimental to a opposition candidate can be just or more valuable to a candidate than an envelope filled with cash. The purpose of the law is to prevent foreign influence in US elections; that purpose would be seriously hampered by allowing foreign governments to do opposition research for US candidates.
Common sense dictates that seeking information cannot be against the law.
30 Oct 19
1 edit
@sleepyguy saidEven in the unfathomably unlikely scenario Trump was merely "seeking truthful information," requesting anything of personal value to him from a foreign leader is illegal as per your constitution.
By "any serious person" you mean lefty partisan hacks, of course. What a limp dodge. What else was he seeking but truthful information, and how can that reasonably be construed as an illegal thing of value?
@no1marauder saidCommon sense says your position is absurd. Reason dictates that the Bidens were involved in a corrupt scheme, and your position is that it is against the law for Trump to ask Ukrainians to shed some light on it. Why? Because voters finding out the Bidens are corrupt might be useful to someone's election campaign! Can't have that! That's just too dumb to be accepted. For starters, why does the first amendment not apply to Trump?
"Common sense" should tell you that information detrimental to a opposition candidate can be just or more valuable to a candidate than an envelope filled with cash. The purpose of the law is to prevent foreign influence in US elections; that purpose would be seriously hampered by allowing foreign governments to do opposition research for US candidates.
I'll rely on common sense over your partisan legal pronouncements. If you were always right George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson would be in jail, and Kavanaugh wouldn't be on the court.
30 Oct 19
1 edit
@sleepyguy saidMy "partisan legal position" is one already adopted by the FEC and the courts.
Common sense says your position is absurd. Reason dictates that the Bidens were involved in a corrupt scheme, and your position is that it is against the law for Trump to ask Ukrainians to shed some light on it. Why? Because voters finding out the Bidens are corrupt might be useful to someone's election campaign! Can't have that! That's just too dumb to be accepted. For sta ...[text shortened]... right George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson would be in jail, and Kavanaugh wouldn't be on the court.
It's rather ironic that your argument just proves how valuable this "thing of value" was to Trump. I guess that's why he willing to exercise his "First Amendment right" to withhold appropriated military aid to the Ukraine unless he got it.