Were you a professional cherry picker? Seriously, was that your job? That would explain a LOT.
It's funny, I read an article on this at lunch just today. Bill Taylor is the Chargé d’Affaires of the U.S. Embassy in Ukraine, and as you say, he said a quid pro quo was crazy.
Here's what you so conveniently left out. Gordon Sondland is the US Ambassador to the EU, and when he heard what Bill Taylor said, he texted Taylor and told him this:
"Bill, I believe you are incorrect about President Trump's intentions. The President has been crystal clear: no quid pro quo's of any kind. The President is trying to evaluate whether Ukraine is truly going to adopt the transparency and reforms that President Zelensky promised during his campaign."
Now, I have never heard of either of these two men. I have no idea who they are, or who is more correct here. One guy feels there is a quid pro quo, the other says there wasn't. That tells
me I have no idea what actually happened. It tells
you, that Trump is guilty.
This is what happens. Conflicting accounts, followed by partisan nuts like you immediately leaping to the conclusion that serves your personal agenda, and you ignore that which doesn't serve your agenda.
Try showing a tiny speck of intellectual honesty once in awhile. You ignore everything that could offer a benign explanation, and everything that makes Trump look bad, you suck it up like a Hoover deluxe and question none of it.
Destroyed.
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/fmr...d-door-session