Serious questions for Trump supporters regarding this impeachment thing

[bripat9643]

No.

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

Your BS is NOT PROOF!!

Saying something is proof does not mean it is !!

Showing quotes and statements and letters from officials isn’t proof? What do you consider proof then?

You haven't posted any quotes, statements of letters from government officials.

I offered to post a letter from congress when you said Biden’s support from the Obama admin doesn’t count. You dismissed the letter as partisan. So no point in posting it. I offered to post proof behind IMFs support of what Biden did. You said it would not change your thoughts about Biden’s actions. So again, if the evidence is not going to sway the debate then I’m not going to waste my time. I’ve done my research, I’ve read it so I know it’s there. But I’m not going to go look it up to show you when it makes no difference. Why are you even asking for it if it’s inconsequential?

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim, fine. Why do you continue whining about it?

 

[Slade3200]

If I show you proof that the IMF pushed for the firing of the prosecutor before Biden got it done will you concede the point that Biden was acting on behalf of our government and the international community and not as a personal attempt to cover for his son?

No.

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

I'm asking because I'm almost certain you can't produce the evidence. I know because I've searched for it myself.

You're absolutely correct that I have an agenda . . . just like you do. However, it's not "no matter what the facts are." So far, I haven't seen anything leftwingers have claimed that is actually a fact.

Again, why would I take the time to show you the proof when it makes no difference in the debate. That’s a waste of my time. Let’s try this.... What would you need to see to convince you that Biden was acting on behalf of our government and the international community and not doing a solo act to cover for his son?

It can be "not solo" and still be done to protect his son.
Do you get that?

I do get it... except for a few things. Firing the prosecutor that wasn’t doing shit about corruption, including not doing anything with the Burisma case which has been dormant for months , that action isn’t protecting his son. Also the accusations being thrown at Biden are saying that he did something corrupt or inappropriate by firing the prosecutor... well if he was acting on behalf of our government and the international community then those accusations can’t be true.

 

[Slade3200]

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

Your BS is NOT PROOF!!

Saying something is proof does not mean it is !!

Showing quotes and statements and letters from officials isn’t proof? What do you consider proof then?

You haven't posted any quotes, statements of letters from government officials.

I offered to post a letter from congress when you said Biden’s support from the Obama admin doesn’t count. You dismissed the letter as partisan. So no point in posting it. I offered to post proof behind IMFs support of what Biden did. You said it would not change your thoughts about Biden’s actions. So again, if the evidence is not going to sway the debate then I’m not going to waste my time. I’ve done my research, I’ve read it so I know it’s there. But I’m not going to go look it up to show you when it makes no difference. Why are you even asking for it if it’s inconsequential?

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim, fine. Why do you continue whining about it?

What am I whining about?

 

[bripat9643]

No.

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

I'm asking because I'm almost certain you can't produce the evidence. I know because I've searched for it myself.

You're absolutely correct that I have an agenda . . . just like you do. However, it's not "no matter what the facts are." So far, I haven't seen anything leftwingers have claimed that is actually a fact.

Again, why would I take the time to show you the proof when it makes no difference in the debate. That’s a waste of my time. Let’s try this.... What would you need to see to convince you that Biden was acting on behalf of our government and the international community and not doing a solo act to cover for his son?

It can be "not solo" and still be done to protect his son.
Do you get that?

I do get it... except for a few things. Firing the prosecutor that wasn’t doing shit about corruption, including not doing anything with the Burisma case which has been dormant for months , that action isn’t protecting his son. Also the accusations being thrown at Biden are saying that he did something corrupt or inappropriate by firing the prosecutor... well if he was acting on behalf of our government and the international community then those accusations can’t be true.

Biden says he was acting on behalf of our government. Has Obama said he told Biden to demand that Ukraine fire Shokin?

 

[bripat9643]

Your BS is NOT PROOF!!

Saying something is proof does not mean it is !!

Showing quotes and statements and letters from officials isn’t proof? What do you consider proof then?

You haven't posted any quotes, statements of letters from government officials.

I offered to post a letter from congress when you said Biden’s support from the Obama admin doesn’t count. You dismissed the letter as partisan. So no point in posting it. I offered to post proof behind IMFs support of what Biden did. You said it would not change your thoughts about Biden’s actions. So again, if the evidence is not going to sway the debate then I’m not going to waste my time. I’ve done my research, I’ve read it so I know it’s there. But I’m not going to go look it up to show you when it makes no difference. Why are you even asking for it if it’s inconsequential?

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim, fine. Why do you continue whining about it?

What am I whining about?

You're whining about having no proof to support your bogus claim.

 

[Billiejeens]

No.

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

I'm asking because I'm almost certain you can't produce the evidence. I know because I've searched for it myself.

You're absolutely correct that I have an agenda . . . just like you do. However, it's not "no matter what the facts are." So far, I haven't seen anything leftwingers have claimed that is actually a fact.

Again, why would I take the time to show you the proof when it makes no difference in the debate. That’s a waste of my time. Let’s try this.... What would you need to see to convince you that Biden was acting on behalf of our government and the international community and not doing a solo act to cover for his son?

It can be "not solo" and still be done to protect his son.
Do you get that?

I do get it... except for a few things. Firing the prosecutor that wasn’t doing shit about corruption, including not doing anything with the Burisma case which has been dormant for months , that action isn’t protecting his son. Also the accusations being thrown at Biden are saying that he did something corrupt or inappropriate by firing the prosecutor... well if he was acting on behalf of our government and the international community then those accusations can’t be true.

The optics are horrible though, yes?

Why is this so important to you?

 

[Slade3200]

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

I'm asking because I'm almost certain you can't produce the evidence. I know because I've searched for it myself.

You're absolutely correct that I have an agenda . . . just like you do. However, it's not "no matter what the facts are." So far, I haven't seen anything leftwingers have claimed that is actually a fact.

Again, why would I take the time to show you the proof when it makes no difference in the debate. That’s a waste of my time. Let’s try this.... What would you need to see to convince you that Biden was acting on behalf of our government and the international community and not doing a solo act to cover for his son?

It can be "not solo" and still be done to protect his son.
Do you get that?

I do get it... except for a few things. Firing the prosecutor that wasn’t doing shit about corruption, including not doing anything with the Burisma case which has been dormant for months , that action isn’t protecting his son. Also the accusations being thrown at Biden are saying that he did something corrupt or inappropriate by firing the prosecutor... well if he was acting on behalf of our government and the international community then those accusations can’t be true.

Biden says he was acting on behalf of our government. Has Obama said he told Biden to demand that Ukraine fire Shokin?

If he did would you clear Biden or wrong doing? I’m not giving you anymore troll bait. And I’m not going on wild goose chases to get evidence that doesn’t sway the argument. I know the game. You ask for proof, I give you proof, you pivot to something else. I’m not playing that game.

You tell me what evidence would convince you that Biden acted appropriately and we can go from there. Let’s see if you are reasonable or a simple troll.

 

[GreenAndBlue]

Biden is so crooked and immoral
He promotes mass baby murder with abortion

 

[Slade3200]

Showing quotes and statements and letters from officials isn’t proof? What do you consider proof then?

You haven't posted any quotes, statements of letters from government officials.

I offered to post a letter from congress when you said Biden’s support from the Obama admin doesn’t count. You dismissed the letter as partisan. So no point in posting it. I offered to post proof behind IMFs support of what Biden did. You said it would not change your thoughts about Biden’s actions. So again, if the evidence is not going to sway the debate then I’m not going to waste my time. I’ve done my research, I’ve read it so I know it’s there. But I’m not going to go look it up to show you when it makes no difference. Why are you even asking for it if it’s inconsequential?

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim, fine. Why do you continue whining about it?

What am I whining about?

You're whining about having no proof to support your bogus claim.

I’m not whining about proof, you are! Haha. I have the proof, I’ve read it. I’m not just not going to play your games and waste time going down your rabbit holes. You tell me what evidence clears Biden and I’ll get that

 

[beagle9]

Why would somebody hire a guy because he's the son of a VP without expecting anything in return? Hiring the guy is one thing. Giving him 600K a year to do nothing is quite another.

What do you think Joe did? Out with it...

People hire “names” all the time. It’s a draw, it raises funds, facilitates meetings, is used for branding and marketing. If you have evidence that there was more and Joe abused the power of his office then say it or stop spreading all this none sense.

Well let's see what Zelensky finds and go from there, because none of us know what really happened, and the Democrats were never expecting a Republican President, and figured they had all their bases covered.

What I think Joe did was get the prosecutor fired for going after the company his son worked for. Burisma has been long known for it's corruption in that country, and it's my theory that Hunter was hired for protection.

And do you think Biden convinced multiple governments to get rid of the prosecutor for the same reason? Do you think Biden did all
of this on his own accord?

So where were all these other governments to get rid of him? I only seen one do that, and it was our government.

There is a bipartisan letter from our congress urging the administration to remove the prosecutor, theres the support of our executive branch, the support of the European Union and the support of Ukraine’s own IMF to remove this guy because he was doing nothing to stop corruption.

Have you done any independent research on this subject? Look for hard evidence not just partisan talking points. That’s the first thing you should have done so you didn’t spend days making false accusations

Is the swamp actually that big ??? Yes it is, but it's ok, because an investigation into it all can be just as good as what that prosecutor was attempting to do until Biden stepped in with his quid pro quo deal.

 

[Slade3200]

Ok then why are you asking for it and why would I bother taking the time to show proof? Especially with these things that can easily be found if you bothered to do a few minutes of research. You’re obviously not here for fair debate. You have an agenda you are here to push no matter what the facts are. That makes you a hack and a troll.

I'm asking because I'm almost certain you can't produce the evidence. I know because I've searched for it myself.

You're absolutely correct that I have an agenda . . . just like you do. However, it's not "no matter what the facts are." So far, I haven't seen anything leftwingers have claimed that is actually a fact.

Again, why would I take the time to show you the proof when it makes no difference in the debate. That’s a waste of my time. Let’s try this.... What would you need to see to convince you that Biden was acting on behalf of our government and the international community and not doing a solo act to cover for his son?

It can be "not solo" and still be done to protect his son.
Do you get that?

I do get it... except for a few things. Firing the prosecutor that wasn’t doing shit about corruption, including not doing anything with the Burisma case which has been dormant for months , that action isn’t protecting his son. Also the accusations being thrown at Biden are saying that he did something corrupt or inappropriate by firing the prosecutor... well if he was acting on behalf of our government and the international community then those accusations can’t be true.

The optics are horrible though, yes?

Why is this so important to you?

Yeah the optics are not good. That’s why Trump is pouncing on it. If he can get some investigations going then he becomes Crooked Joe and the lock him up chants start. Deja vu. I think we know the play book.

Despite the optics, when you dig into the details there is nothing inappropriate going on.

 

[bripat9643]

You haven't posted any quotes, statements of letters from government officials.

I offered to post a letter from congress when you said Biden’s support from the Obama admin doesn’t count. You dismissed the letter as partisan. So no point in posting it. I offered to post proof behind IMFs support of what Biden did. You said it would not change your thoughts about Biden’s actions. So again, if the evidence is not going to sway the debate then I’m not going to waste my time. I’ve done my research, I’ve read it so I know it’s there. But I’m not going to go look it up to show you when it makes no difference. Why are you even asking for it if it’s inconsequential?

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim, fine. Why do you continue whining about it?

What am I whining about?

You're whining about having no proof to support your bogus claim.

I’m not whining about proof, you are! Haha. I have the proof, I’ve read it. I’m not just not going to play your games and waste time going down your rabbit holes. You tell me what evidence clears Biden and I’ll get that

Sure you have.

 

[Slade3200]

What do you think Joe did? Out with it...

People hire “names” all the time. It’s a draw, it raises funds, facilitates meetings, is used for branding and marketing. If you have evidence that there was more and Joe abused the power of his office then say it or stop spreading all this none sense.

Well let's see what Zelensky finds and go from there, because none of us know what really happened, and the Democrats were never expecting a Republican President, and figured they had all their bases covered.

What I think Joe did was get the prosecutor fired for going after the company his son worked for. Burisma has been long known for it's corruption in that country, and it's my theory that Hunter was hired for protection.

And do you think Biden convinced multiple governments to get rid of the prosecutor for the same reason? Do you think Biden did all
of this on his own accord?

So where were all these other governments to get rid of him? I only seen one do that, and it was our government.

There is a bipartisan letter from our congress urging the administration to remove the prosecutor, theres the support of our executive branch, the support of the European Union and the support of Ukraine’s own IMF to remove this guy because he was doing nothing to stop corruption.

Have you done any independent research on this subject? Look for hard evidence not just partisan talking points. That’s the first thing you should have done so you didn’t spend days making false accusations

Is the swamp actually that big ??? Yes it is, but it's ok, because an investigation into it all can be just as good as what that prosecutor was attempting to do until Biden stepped in with his quid pro quo deal.

What was the prosecutor doing? Because all the reports I’ve seen point to him not doing jack shit about corruption. Including not moving on Burisma.

 

[Slade3200]

I offered to post a letter from congress when you said Biden’s support from the Obama admin doesn’t count. You dismissed the letter as partisan. So no point in posting it. I offered to post proof behind IMFs support of what Biden did. You said it would not change your thoughts about Biden’s actions. So again, if the evidence is not going to sway the debate then I’m not going to waste my time. I’ve done my research, I’ve read it so I know it’s there. But I’m not going to go look it up to show you when it makes no difference. Why are you even asking for it if it’s inconsequential?

If you don't have any evidence to support your claim, fine. Why do you continue whining about it?

What am I whining about?

You're whining about having no proof to support your bogus claim.

I’m not whining about proof, you are! Haha. I have the proof, I’ve read it. I’m not just not going to play your games and waste time going down your rabbit holes. You tell me what evidence clears Biden and I’ll get that

Sure you have.

Sounds like youre done. Thanks for playing

 

[beagle9]

That's a good question. What actual crime are they going to accuse Trump of committing?

Abuse of power, misuse of public office, breaking public trust, soliciting campaign aid from a foreign government

Except for the last one, none of those things are actual crimes, and that one never happened. He didn't solicit campaign funds from a foreign government, you lying puss bag.

Adam Schiff and Nazi Piglosi can be charged with all of those.

The law doesn’t say it has to be funds, just something of value. And as for the other things I listed, those valid as defined by the political constitutional process of impeachment .

You said "campaign funds," moron. "Funds" means money. Furthermore, as has been demonstrated thousands of times previously, campaign contributions must be something tangible. Information isn't considered "something of value."

You turds never tire of repeating this lie. That's because lies are all you have to prop up your mindless hate.

I see "aid", not "funds".
.

Same thing, as aid is given in the way of funds.

 

[Slade3200]

Abuse of power, misuse of public office, breaking public trust, soliciting campaign aid from a foreign government

Except for the last one, none of those things are actual crimes, and that one never happened. He didn't solicit campaign funds from a foreign government, you lying puss bag.

Adam Schiff and Nazi Piglosi can be charged with all of those.

The law doesn’t say it has to be funds, just something of value. And as for the other things I listed, those valid as defined by the political constitutional process of impeachment .

You said "campaign funds," moron. "Funds" means money. Furthermore, as has been demonstrated thousands of times previously, campaign contributions must be something tangible. Information isn't considered "something of value."

You turds never tire of repeating this lie. That's because lies are all you have to prop up your mindless hate.

I see "aid", not "funds".
.

Same thing as aid is given in the way of funds.

Funds are a type of aid. Aid doesn’t mean funds. There are other ways to provide aid.

What’s going on today? Did everybody forget to turn their brains on?

 

[beagle9]

Well let's see what Zelensky finds and go from there, because none of us know what really happened, and the Democrats were never expecting a Republican President, and figured they had all their bases covered.

What I think Joe did was get the prosecutor fired for going after the company his son worked for. Burisma has been long known for it's corruption in that country, and it's my theory that Hunter was hired for protection.

And do you think Biden convinced multiple governments to get rid of the prosecutor for the same reason? Do you think Biden did all
of this on his own accord?

So where were all these other governments to get rid of him? I only seen one do that, and it was our government.

There is a bipartisan letter from our congress urging the administration to remove the prosecutor, theres the support of our executive branch, the support of the European Union and the support of Ukraine’s own IMF to remove this guy because he was doing nothing to stop corruption.

Have you done any independent research on this subject? Look for hard evidence not just partisan talking points. That’s the first thing you should have done so you didn’t spend days making false accusations

Is the swamp actually that big ??? Yes it is, but it's ok, because an investigation into it all can be just as good as what that prosecutor was attempting to do until Biden stepped in with his quid pro quo deal.

What was the prosecutor doing? Because all the reports I’ve seen point to him not doing jack shit about corruption. Including not moving on Burisma.

He was investigating, and that takes time just ask the Democrats. But he was removed before the investigation could be completed thanks to Biden ?

 

[beagle9]

So where were all these other governments to get rid of him? I only seen one do that, and it was our government.

There is a bipartisan letter from our congress urging the administration to remove the prosecutor, theres the support of our executive branch, the support of the European Union and the support of Ukraine’s own IMF to remove this guy because he was doing nothing to stop corruption.

Have you done any independent research on this subject? Look for hard evidence not just partisan talking points. That’s the first thing you should have done so you didn’t spend days making false accusations

It seems to me all you have is partisan talking points. Ignoring what Biden said about withholding funds to the Ukraine, his son getting a winning lottery ticket, the political unrest by the Democrats all point in one direction if you ask me. But you choose to ignore every one.

Partisan talking point? No Ray, I’m pointing to actual things that disprove your narrative. If all these entities wanted this guy gone then it doesn’t matter what Biden said... it makes his actions that of multiple governments not personal gain. This is elementary stuff, how is it going over your head?

Even if they did want him gone, he remained until Biden demanded he be fired in return for $1 billion.

No shit sherlock. Biden was assigned to be point guy with Ukraine. This is like trying to explain algebra to preschoolers. You’re embarrassing yourself man.

Who assigned him and why ? Conflict of interest involved due to his son wouldn't you say ?

 

[Slade3200]

And do you think Biden convinced multiple governments to get rid of the prosecutor for the same reason? Do you think Biden did all
of this on his own accord?

So where were all these other governments to get rid of him? I only seen one do that, and it was our government.

There is a bipartisan letter from our congress urging the administration to remove the prosecutor, theres the support of our executive branch, the support of the European Union and the support of Ukraine’s own IMF to remove this guy because he was doing nothing to stop corruption.

Have you done any independent research on this subject? Look for hard evidence not just partisan talking points. That’s the first thing you should have done so you didn’t spend days making false accusations

Is the swamp actually that big ??? Yes it is, but it's ok, because an investigation into it all can be just as good as what that prosecutor was attempting to do until Biden stepped in with his quid pro quo deal.

What was the prosecutor doing? Because all the reports I’ve seen point to him not doing jack shit about corruption. Including not moving on Burisma.

He was investigating, and that takes time just as the Democrats. But he was removed before the investigation could be completed thanks to Biden ?

I’ll say it again, the international community wanted him gone because he wasn’t investigating and he wasn’t doing shit about corruption. This was a bipartisan sentiment in our own congress at the time. Your drunk on trumps koolaid. Go learn the facts

 

[Slade3200]

There is a bipartisan letter from our congress urging the administration to remove the prosecutor, theres the support of our executive branch, the support of the European Union and the support of Ukraine’s own IMF to remove this guy because he was doing nothing to stop corruption.

Have you done any independent research on this subject? Look for hard evidence not just partisan talking points. That’s the first thing you should have done so you didn’t spend days making false accusations

It seems to me all you have is partisan talking points. Ignoring what Biden said about withholding funds to the Ukraine, his son getting a winning lottery ticket, the political unrest by the Democrats all point in one direction if you ask me. But you choose to ignore every one.

Partisan talking point? No Ray, I’m pointing to actual things that disprove your narrative. If all these entities wanted this guy gone then it doesn’t matter what Biden said... it makes his actions that of multiple governments not personal gain. This is elementary stuff, how is it going over your head?

Even if they did want him gone, he remained until Biden demanded he be fired in return for $1 billion.

No shit sherlock. Biden was assigned to be point guy with Ukraine. This is like trying to explain algebra to preschoolers. You’re embarrassing yourself man.

Who assigned him and why ? Conflict of interest involved due to his son wouldn't you say ?

No. Why would you say that?