No, you get over it. I provide credible links below proving my assertions, you put up bullshit.Your lame excuses change nothing. Dershowitz is a paid shill, and the other has been directly contradicted by all the other evidence.1. I'll take a Harvard law professor's opinion over anyone you have. Who do you have? I never see any major Law professors putting their reputation on the line for the democrat's list of bullshit "impeachable crimes".Deshowitz is a trained lapdog for faux. He will say what they tell him to."Don't worry about those blindfolds you're wearing, we'll continue to spoon feed you all of your favorite fantasies."
That's what you're doing to yourself, it's called confirmation bias. Look it up.
So you will call any evidence of trump's wrong doing nothing more than confirmation bias? That's as goofy as trump calling everything he doesn't like "fake news" That fat fool is so used to calling everything fake till he even said the emoluments clause in the constitution is a fake clause. Are you really gonna be as predictable and goofy as him?
What we're saying is that your "evidence" isn't worth anything.
First, Professor Alan Dershowitz says the Ukraine call isn't "evidence" of wrongdoing.
Ukraine Transcript Isn't Impeachable or Criminal: Kevin McCullough with Alan Dershowitz - Townhall Review | Conservative Commentary On Today's News - Omny.fm
Second, the timeline for the "evidence" disproves any "quid-pro-quo".
Ukrainian official appears to cast doubt on quid pro quo claim
So please stop with the fake news already. There is no there there.
The other link is a month outta date and completely irrelevant in light of the last few weeks revelations.
Try again tRumpling.
2. The timeline is what is valid. There was no QPQ because the Ukraine didn't know that the funding was being delayed, duh. From the article:
"An unnamed Ukrainian official said that Kiev was not made aware that the U.S. suspended security funds until a month after President Trump's call with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky, which calls into question the whistleblower's account and Democrats' arguments that there was a quid pro quo for the aid."
You are wrong.
Get over it.
1. Prove Dershowitz's arguments are not valid.
Bloomberg - Are you a robot?
Opinion | Hamilton Wouldn’t Impeach Trump
Trump's Ukraine transcript: Unwise words but no proof of a crime
p.s. this last opinion is by Jonathon Turley a GW Law Professor.
2. The democrats are not using a correct -protocol to start an impeachment inquiry, so the senate will just dismiss it.
Graham to introduce resolution condemning House impeachment inquiry