You’re dodging it. While I might not believe much of what Schumer says, that doesn’t mean he’s always wrong. My hypothetical included “proof positive”, i.e. evidence the FBI would believe. And if somebody gave that to Schumer and he gave it to the FBI, you would praise him for getting it. You know you would.
Since that law only appears to exist in the mind (yours),
Oh, my. While I appreciate your attempt to interpret the law, I think you are totally wrong and I think you are making excuses for what is treasonous behavior (in the literal if not legal sense). Save the tears for the hatred of Trump causing this - what he did was just plain wrong and any real patriotic American understands this.
No, I’m not dodging it. Besides the fact that it would be wrong to get this evidence from a foreign government as an elected representative of the United States as it is the responsibility of law enforcement, it would be idiotic for him to do so because the right wing media would just claim bias. Forget the FBI saying they believe it, you know that the Fox News/Rush Limbaugh would be just saying it is the ‘deep state’ or whatever their excuse is for anyone who thinks that Trump did something wrong and/or criminal. So, I’m not dodging it. It’s not only wrong for Schumer to do it, it’s just plain dumb for Schumer to do it.
Read the Federal Election Commission regulations and you’ll see. They say it straight up. No interpretation needed.
Nonsense. If Schumer got definitive evidence of an impeachable offense from Kim Jong-Un, you would praise him for it. And neither you nor the liberal media would pay the slightest attention to what Limbaugh or anybody else like him might say, though actually Limbaugh would probably be howling for Trump’s impeachment himself if real and convincing evidence of an impeachable offense was presented.
Yes, I’ve mentioned specific laws to you and now Theo. You choose to interpret them in a way that let’s your boy slide. I’m sure any defense attorney would love to see you on a jury.
You seem to have a conversation in your head with what you think I said instead of actually reading what I say. I did not say I wanted to hang him. I said his behavior was traitorous by the colloquial if not the legal definition. I said I think he broke the law and I said which law I think he broke. The accusations that he committed a crime are no discernibly false. They are a matter of legal debate.
Now you are straight out calling me a liar. Nice.
So now you cover for being a liar by saying that you would be ok with illegal behavior.
And you know who I would expect to compare the Dems to the old Soviet Politburo. A Russian Troll. Because they would be the ones to know.
B S!,
Oh, not at all. Ideologically blinded and deluded, yes. I have no opinion as to whether you would deliberately tell a lie.
Geez, Theo, I did in response to you above. If you are going to reply to my posts, at least read my replies to you.
Actually, you did. I said that I think Schumer would be wrong to gather information and you said I would be fine to have Schumer gather information. So, you called me a liar. And you don’t even have the guts to admit it.
How many Russian trolls do you actually know?
You did call me a liar and now you want to pretend like you didn’t. And somehow, you think you can maintain the ability to have credibility on this topic. Listen if you can’t be honest about calling me a liar, why should anyone believe anything that comes out of your keyboard?
I’m not going to adopt your view of what I meant no matter how many times you say it.
Not surprising. I tell you what I meant and you told me that you don’t believe me and I would do the opposite. I.e., you called me a liar. And then you say I didn’t call you a liar but you don’t give any reason why I shouldn’t take what you said as anything other than you calling me a liar. If you are willing to lie about calling me a liar, then you are willing to lie about everything else to make DTJ not responsible for acting in a treasonous manner. So, no, I don’t expect you to say you would adopt my point of view. I’m just pointing out to everyone else reading that you are willing to lie about the most mundane things to make your point and that should be kept in mind whenever they read something you wrote.
One more time.
So, you realize that, at this point, you just called me a liar. Forget the rest. I said what I meant and you told me you didn’t believe what I said to be true. And yet, with the very next sentence you claim that this is not calling me a liar.