Sat Sep 28, 2019, 02:17 PM

Would it make any difference if there actually was dirt?

Seems to me it is entirely moot.

It happens to be the case that there's nothing there, but even if--in another scenario, with different actors--wouldn't it be just as wrong and impeachable if the target *were* dirty?

I think it may be important to emphasize this, lest the narrative get bogged down in irrelevent issues.

What do you think?

7 replies, 731 views

Thread info Bookmark this thread Trash this thread

Reply to this thread

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum

Replies to this discussion thread

7 replies	Author	Time	Post
Would it make any difference if there actually was dirt? (Original post)	intrepidity	Sep 2019	OP
Irrelevant	Pachamama	Sep 2019	#1
Legally, no.	klook	Sep 2019	#2
Agree.	Nevermypresident	Sep 2019	#3
no, this is no different than police searching your home without a warrant.	Takket	Sep 2019	#4
Good analogy. n/t	Beartracks	Sep 2019	#6
Two wrongs still wouldn't have made a right.	Beartracks	Sep 2019	#5
No of course not. His actions are independent of that.	Claritie Pixie	Sep 2019	#7

Response to intrepidity (Original post)

Sat Sep 28, 2019, 02:20 PM

Pachamama (16,666 posts)

1. Irrelevant

That’s like a bank robber claiming that after they picked up the money from the road it’s theirs when it fell off the getaway car that it’s found money.

A crime was committed by Trump and his co-conspirators

Reply to this post

Response to intrepidity (Original post)

Sat Sep 28, 2019, 02:21 PM

klook (11,532 posts)