Zanten said:
UnderstatedCornHole said:
Absolutely agree, that's what I have already said countless times.
(provided there is bi-partisan support for it, any potential abuse of this nature and scale should be looked at with a fine toothcomb)
|
Soooo why the witch hunt comment, then? o.O
I simply pointed out that Trump's rather, er, 'flexible' definition of the truth has made it so that the man's word on the issue of pretty much anything- policy, personal, etc- unreliable, and that they're going to need outside investigation and confirmation to back it up. This doesn't just apply to the Russia thing, but really anything he says; there's a saying that 'Talk Is Cheap,' but with Trump it's essentially worthless. The fact that he's also been stubbornly shifty when it comes to Russia being involved at ALL in the hacking- the whole "Fat guy sitting in Jersey' thing- also starts to come across as protesting a tad too much.
And from what I understand, the call for an investigation is pretty bipartisan, with Republicans chiming in along with the Democrats. If there have been shenanigans that the rest of the Republican party didn't know about, I'm guessing they'd want to find out BEFORE they risk having him represent their party for the next four years. =P If Trump is in any way compromised- I mean, beyond the catering-to-big-businesses compromised- then anything he does will end up reflecting on the Republican party even after he's gone. And with Rex Tillerson now, I believe, confirmed for Secretary of State, those concerns are just going to grow.
|
I agree, seems reasonable. You haven't made a judgement.
What would you consider grounds for condemning Trump going forward that someone who thinks he should be given a chance? I think saying there are concerns is completely fair but specifically, what would need to turn up to make those concerns something genuinely corrupt? How would that be proven and shown? How would liberals be satisfied that those concerns were baseless?
See that's my issue here really with the liberals and that includes deskpro2k3 and Soundwave in this thread, they have this style of placing a bomb then running away and then placing another bomb. It's what all liberals do, it's very hard to actually have a conversation.
Trump did this, ok well he might not have done that but he did that, and that, oh he did that too (etc)
Don't take that the wrong way, it's not intended to be inflammatory, it's how it reads. There doesn't seem to be any concrete points to respond to apart from adhominem.
