Quote:
Originally Posted by spence
So you are ok with a sitting president abusing their power at the expense of our national security?
Sure sounds like it.
Do you have any talking points that haven’t been contradicted with testimony under oath?
You do know Nunes Is giving the house republicans nothing right?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device
|
if a sitting VP can use withheld aid as leverage to get what he wants, i don’t see why it’s an “abuse of power” for a president that do the same. Certainly it’s within the scope if the chief executive to ascertain the truth about what americans ( even
democrats) are doing.
i also don’t think you overturn a duly elected president, over hearsay and “presumptions”. that’s not even circumstantial evidence, which is at least evidence. as of this moment, hearsay and presumptions is all we have.
Why did Sondland read a 23-page opening statement which didn’t include the words “by the way, this is all presumption, i have zero direct evidence connecting Trump to this.”? Answer, because this isn’t about facts, it’s about getting rid of a president they hate. gimme an alternative reason for excluding such a key fact from
a 23 page opening statement.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device