See that post, it's explained there.
I have a problem with all the other President's pardoning the undeserved. But he took it to another level by adding the self-destruction of his recent impeachment defense.
I do not know 100% for sure nor do I think anyone else does - but I would like to participate in the anyone know why ________ pardoned _____________inquiries.
He did. And they did a pretty good job. Explained what is required for something to be a quid pro quo.ousdahl wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:02 amWait, he had an impeachment defense?
Trump's lawyers offered absolutely zero refutation of the facts. They didn't even really advance any legal arguments. It was really not a lot more than gussied up Fox News talking points, and finger-pointing back at the democrats.IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:05 amHe did. And they did a pretty good job. Explained what is required for something to be a quid pro quo.
This is one among a number of reasons why it’s impossible to take you seriously, no matter how hard I try.
For some things, yes I'd agree there was a lot of that (which was true for both sides at various points of the "trial" that I watched).jfish26 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:55 amTrump's lawyers offered absolutely zero refutation of the facts. They didn't even really advance any legal arguments. It was really not a lot more than gussied up Fox News talking points, and finger-pointing back at the democrats.IllinoisJayhawk wrote: ↑Wed Feb 19, 2020 8:05 amHe did. And they did a pretty good job. Explained what is required for something to be a quid pro quo.
Well, in all fairness, I was just trying to be a smart ass by asking a question since 87% of ousdahls posts are statements disguised as questions (the other 13% are made up scenarios about work/roommates/and imaginary pet names).
Sorry, didn't see this before.