DJ Pauly D

lol. Well, by picking up the phone for starters. 3iivlc.jpg (click to show)

Wrong scandal, try again.

It's not a defense. You are just wrong about which scandal, and yes people are still beating that old drum. Try to talk these thing out more rather than insulting so quickly. https://twitter.com/alx/status/1206764075583188993/video/1

Trump attempted to “collude” with Ukraine, too. I.e. attempted to coordinate with the Ukrainian government to receive a tangible benefit to his 2020 campaign (specifically: The public announcement by Ukraine of an investigation into Hunter Biden, and/or the public announcement by Ukraine into Ukranian “election interference” in the 2016 election, a discredited conspiracy theory floated by Russia).

Whether those efforts by Trump, his personal lawyers, and others in the Administration are now being termed “collusion” in the press is immaterial.

It’s all in the House report.

https://intelligence.house.gov/report/

That's some extreme pretzel twisting reasoning and complicated hoops you jumped though rather than just admitting to the possibility of making a mistake. You even changed your theory of what Trump did wrong to get to that answer.

And of course you're also spreading your own falsehoods with the democratic talking point.
https://libertyunyielding.com/2019/09/23/ukraine-has-evidence-their-government-colluded-with-the-clinton-campaign/

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/01/ukraine-sabotage-trump-backfire-233446

https://sharylattkisson.com/2019/11/timeline-of-alleged-sabotage-of-trump-in-2016-by-democrats-ukraine/

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/washington-post-admits-ukraine-interfered-in-2016-election-but-attempts-to-minimize-its-effect

Dude all he did was try to play a gotcha game of saying I had the “wrong scandal” in mind. My first response meme made the point: it’s immaterial. It’s not pretzel logic to talk about both scandals in relation to each other at this point, but indeed sensible.

Trump is doing basically the same thing in Ukraine that he did with Russia during the 2016 campaign — only now it’s much worse because he’s president rather than just a candidate for president, and he is communicating directly with foreign heads-of-state to try to receive tangible benefits. Many other reasons this new scandal is more serious, too.

Remember re: Russia, when Donald Jr. had those emails and took that meeting with the Russian lawyer during the 2016 campaign? As a fair minded person, I took a look at that evidence and thought it wasn’t strong enough to implicate Trump for purposes of impeachment. Many liberals disagreed with me. But I concluded that if it was an attempt at “collusion” with Russia, it was an abortive one that ultimately went nowhere. I don’t believe the Mueller team found solid enough evidence of Trump’s own involvement. Also no direct evidence Putin was involved, although he probably was since he has a hand in just about anything of importance that happens in Russia. Putin is just good at covering his tracks.

Now — If you compare that with what happened in Ukraine — this time it went straight to the top with direct evidence of Trump’s personal involvement as evidenced in the Zelensky phone call transcript. Many others in the Administration, and his personal lawyer Giuliani, were in on it. They were talking directly with the highest-level Ukrainian diplomats and indeed even the Ukrainian president. It was a sustained effort over months and involved the tacit threat of withholding billions in military aid. The scheme blew up in his face once the whistleblowers spoke up, details of this were made public, and he had to abort the plan, but until then it was full steam ahead.

Again — Russiagate was troubling but not impeachment-worthy in my mind. All this is Ukraine stuff though? 100% impeachment worthy.

Further twisting that pretzel, but nice justification fallacy, Bulverism, and red herring rambling..

It’s simply not “pretzel-twisting” or a red herring at this point to talk about Trump’s entire history of stepping into election-related scandals. It’s becoming a discernible pattern.

That said: we don’t have to. He can be impeached just with respect to the Ukraine stuff.

No, changing the subject to talk about something completely different is the definition of a read-herring. Trying to justify conflating issues and pretending that A is also Not A is “pretzel-twisting” logic.

And you need to also keep up with the impeachment news, as your justification con-flagellation is dated.