Where did you say it? You said it over and over about the Russian interference in the election. No big deal, been going on for decades
LOL. Dude seriously, when one has to claim that others said things to try to argue, you are done. I have said it has been going on for decades. I have asked why people suddenly care now? Where did I say it was no big deal? Please provide a link.
You said it when Trump tried to pull troops out of Syria the first time. The NSA, Joint Chiefs, SOD, Congressional leadership all said it was a bad idea. No worries, this has been going on for decades, the president going against the advice of all his advisors is no big deal.
Trump never tried to pull troops out of anywhere. He is the CIC. He either does or he does not. Nobody overrides him. Not how it works. I mean, I am beginning to understand why the convos on this board take place. Posters do not understand the most basic crap.
Please provide a link where it states I said it was no big deal. The politicians/civilians make the decisions. Not the NSA, JC, SOD or anyone else. It is the way it works. Again, why do people suddenly care that the politician makes the final choice that overrides his advice?
Like it or not, this was his campaign platform. Also, I seem to remember many here voting for Obama because he vowed to end long and stupid wars. Now Trump does it, which was his campaign platform, and all hell breaks loose.
You said it when it came to the bailout of the farmers.
Huh?
I said, "To try and equate foreign lobbying or meddling or fundraising with the president calling for an investigation by foreign powers into a possible election opponent is ridiculous. Your answer was why? Because they're totally different freakin actions that's why. Just because they both deal with foreign powers doesn't make them the same thing. Then you fall back, once again, on your well worn excuse ......." implying that this has not been done before". Then you pivot to Biden, which wasn't even part of the conversation. Why don't you tell me the last time a POTUS publicly called for a foreign power to investigate a possible political opponent in the next election?
I said Trump was obviously more open and upfront about it.
Haven't seen the Ukrainian diplomat saying they wanted to help Clinton. Yeah? You got something besides this guy saying it? You realize Volker made it clear there would be no summit unless Ukraine agreed to investigate. You saw the text messages from Taylor?
You totally ignore all the info about why Biden demanded Shokin be fired. And he wasn't investigating Hunter, he was investigating Burisma.....but who's counting. Does it matter that Prosecutor General Lusenko found no evidence Hunter did anything wrong? You look at a video and ignore all the circumstances around the action. Doesn't matter if the prosecutor was IGNORING the very corruption Trump says he wants to investigate. Doesn't matter that half the free world, the IMF,and the Obama admin felt he needed to go. Just focus on the video with no context, makes sense.
You guys want an investigation, bring something besides rumor and innuendo.
Well, hope one feels better after that rant.
If one has not seen or heard what Ukranian diplomats/parliament wanted to help Clinton not sure what to say.
Did you see texts from Volker and Sondland? They made it clear no QPQ message from Trump. Hell, Ukraine did not even know money had been suspended.
My issue is not with Hunter. He is taking the silver spoon daddy provided him. Many kids have done that. Yeah Obama dropped the ball here. Biden, with his son on the board of a company the prosecutor said under oath he was fired for investigating, and Clinton taking donations from oligarch/parliament member-he should have designated a special envoy. Now, there are issues.
Sure Ukraine is corrupt and were involved in pay for play. I am all for investigating any of these countries before they get money and making demands they address issues before they get aid or a summit. Pretty simple. How one has an issue with Trump wanting an investigation and not an issue with above is a bit hypocritical. Hey, lets write free checks or something.
And again, stricter foreign aid, less American overseas involvement-all part of his platform. Sure, there is positive and negative with that.