Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete F.
He presumed by inference based on his knowledge of the facts and discussions with other people involved.
An inference is not a suspicion or a guess. It is a reasoned, logical decision to conclude that a fact exists on the basis of other facts that you know exist. Odd that they all came to the same conclusion, isn't it?
One Floridaman toady or another asked him a question that required a yes or no answer, but he and several other witnesses testified as to the implied intent of the actions of the people involved and the person they were working for and that it was common knowledge that Floridaman wanted and investigation of Biden announced in return for a meeting and military aid.
Sort of like Nunes "statements" that had nothing to do with the hearings but were only made to provide carefully orchestrated spin talking points.
|
i understand
the difference between a presumption and a wild, random guess. But a presumption isn’t evidence.
if trump called his own witnesses who said “since ukraine got the aid and since there was no investigation, I presume there was no quid pro quo”, that is also a presumption arrived at after a logical review of facts. would
you consider that evidence of his innocence?
You seem to immediately believe all presumptions that help the left, and immediately dismiss all
presumptions that help the right.
Can you cite any examples that don’t follow that pattern?
He’s not getting removed from office. No chance. And given the weak slate of democratic candidates currently running, there’s a good chance he gets re elected.
As rockhound said, we’re due for a recession, that usually marks
the end of the run for the party in power.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device