Whistleblower Has Three Potential Biases Against Trump

I don't understand any of it. Rather, I understand the motivation for the president to say it and I understand your blinding bias for none of this to be true, but that leads me to not understand how any human being with a working brain could believe you or the quote above. Ask anyone shaken down by the mob if they have been shaken down by the mob. If they answer truthfully, they or their family or friends are harmed or killed. Likewise if the president of Ukraine, a country that is currently under de fact assault by Russia and has internal political struggles where perceived weakness would cost him his leadership position, is asked if he was shaken down by the president of the US there is WAY more motivation to say no than to say yes. And he knows this, he's saying no publicly to save face because admitting the truth helps him exactly zero. This is such basic human psychology that I can't understand how you don't see it. Of course you're being willfully ignorant and a great motivated reasoner, but neither of those things make you right.

 

Trump made the call - that’s what “points to Trump”.

 

Where did he ask for that? He specifically asked to investigate any corruption with Biden's son with NO reciprocity, we call that a request. Which is in line with Clinton's treaty.

 

And so you agree, Trump didn’t ask for general help in investigating corruption, he asked for a specific “favor” in investigating a certain political rival.

 

Your post is the comedy of the day. The President of the Ukraine, the other party on the phone with Trump said there was no attempted blackmail to investigate Biden. Both parties say it didn't happen, but we're supposed to believe you cockamamie suppositions? No human being with a working brain could believe you when both parties said it didn't happen.

 

He asked for specific help in investigating corruption involving Burmisa.

 

Oh is it a transcript again?

I thought it wasn't a transcript.

 

And SPECIFICALLY mentioned Biden’s name multiple times. That is not a general request. It’s a specific request to investigate a political rival.

 

Since the release of the notes qbout the phone call the whistleblower is now irrelevant because we have solid evidence

 

Says the people who keep giving us the "HES TEH POLITICALZ OPPONENTZ".

 

That’s what Trump called it. You calling him a liar?

 

"Solid evidence" of what exactly.

 

There is no way he didn't ask the Ukraine to investigate Biden in exchange for better foreign policy treatment. Is that worth removing him from office over? Maybe or maybe not. Is it worth impeaching him over? Probably yes. It's certainily not helping his re-election bid in any case.

 

No, that's what you just called it.

I guess Democrats read the dictionary enough to finally figure out why Trump was calling it a transcript.

 

Where, other than your hopes and feelings, did that happen?

Certainly not in the transcript.

 

It is from 538
https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/trump-approval-ratings/

 

That Trump did in fact make the call and that he specifically asked for a “favor” in regards to the Bidens. You can not deny that.

 

No he hates the person he is accusing of robbing a bank based on hearsay evidence not his own first hand witnessing and the bank states unequivocally it wasn't robbed.

 

Quote him asking the Chinese to do anything.

 

I think because the transcript shows absolutely no proof of quid pro quo, not to mention the obvious truth that the leader Trump was talking to admitted he didn’t hear any nor was pressured at all. Kind of hard to call someone’s actions forced when the person being shaken down didn’t feel forced to do anything.

It’s like when parents of boys who were “raped” by hot teachers tell everyone he was raped while the boy is hi5ing his friends. Nope, not forced into sex.

Prosecuted:You were raped were you!!!
Boy: Uuuum no. It was the best time I ever had!! Can I do it again?

 

So you know who it is and their exact relationship to the case? Trump would pay a lot for that info.

 

Keep laughing all you want. If you've decided that you're right and everyone else is wrong, why come to a place to debate? If you think you're going to convince me and win, think again. The reason you can't convince me is because you are arguing your belief in lieu of reason, logic, and the data at hand. What you are arguing is what you WANT things to be and you are looking for any anomaly to desperately prove it. It's a losing position every time.

Here's an analogy as to why you are wrong. Let's say your neighbor calls and reports a loud argument coming from your home. They show up and find your significant other has a black eye and a broken rib and you have a cut on your knuckle. Both you and your significant other say there was no fight. Should the police walk away and say all it well?

The only difference between my analogy and what we are discussing is that there is no court of law when it comes to impeachment. So there is no need for the Ukrainian president to EVER admit, testify, or "press charges" in order to impeach Trump. The evidence at hand is enough to impeach him for sure. I don't need the word of the Ukrainian president to make the most logical of conclusions based on the evidence Trump himself provided. Sorry.

 

Trumpettes are arguing about punctuation, or anything else to deflect from the actions of their criminal president.

At this point, it's all about delaying the process. Trumpettes are not interested in facts, they just want to run out the clock until the election in hope that they can somehow get their criminal re-elected.

No values whatsoever.

 

It would still be a crime, wouldn’t it.

 

Oh no. He asked for a favor.

Stop the ****ing presses.

This has never happened in the history of our Republic, I'm sure.