@zaryia said:
I literally answered this in my last post. C'mon man:
I think public opinion is very intriguing and important. It's good to know what most of the country thinks. Politicians also care about polls, hence internal polling.
Also it's simply political news. What's the issue?
No one is saying we should use polls to pass judgement. Your opinion is completely out based off of a straw-man argument that was never brought up by anyone but you.
I'm just stating most Americans want Trump removed and impeached. Just a fact based off of the results of these polls.
Public opinion is very intriguing and important. It's good to know what most of the country thinks. Politicians also care about polls, hence internal polling.
- The 4 corroborating sworn testimonies are not ambiguous. They directly state what Trump did and corroborate the CREDIBLE WB Report.
- The text messages are not ambiguous. They directly state the Diplomats saying it was bad.
- The transcript is not ambiguous. Trump asks for aid with Biden.
There literally is evidence. To say otherwise is to lie. This is a fact.
There is evidence.
Ok, then again you should look up justice and our legal system because you do not convict anyone in America based on public opinion nor should a senate.
Political news? not really. Political news would be some credible actual unambiguous evidence.
And if most Americans want him gone, then wait for 2020 and go vote, we are litterally a few months away.
Public opinion is very intriguing and important. It's good to know what most of the country thinks. Politicians also care about polls, hence internal polling.
- The 4 corroborating sworn testimonies are not ambiguous. They directly state what Trump did and corroborate the CREDIBLE WB Report.
- The text messages are not ambiguous. They directly state the Diplomats saying it was bad.
- The transcript is not ambiguous. Trump asks for aid with Biden.
There literally is evidence. To say otherwise is to lie. This is a fact.
There is evidence.
Public opinion is not interesting when we are talking about someone´s life here and justice. All that matters is evidence and that they get a fair trial.
As to your so-called evidence, First of all, the 4 does not equal to actual evidence, they are also not based on actual first-hand knowledge, 2 are based on second hand, and one is I assume you mean the call log which is highly ambiguous and does not actually state anything.
The text message is again in the same area, it´s ambiguous and does not equal actual ironclad evidence, it´s interpreted based on where your political affiliation is.
The transcript does not actually confirm anything, again you are reading what you want because you want it to be a certain way.
So no there is not any actual evidence, it´s circumstantial and any two-bit lawyer would get his client of.
Log in to comment