Inori
NAWF
Also can't believe we have to look like we're defending a career politician like Pelosi lol
lol man fuck her!
i shoulda been following her triflin asses stock moves tho. She makin bank!
Also can't believe we have to look like we're defending a career politician like Pelosi lol
Your first paragraph is itI think ive lost the plot of this debate. I thought the initial argument was - hey.. election denial from both sides is trash which I agree with.
Once it was pointed out that one sides election denial led to an investigation and the others led to an insurrection.. thats where I felt things separated.
What exactly are we arguing here?
She came to a conclusion (hijacked election) before substantiating it (wasn't hijacked)How are we supposed to disregard what happened after the fact when its relevant? Lol
Its not the same no matter how you cut it
Let me take this moment to be clear I don't defend trump, his actions or believe he'd be a decent president.Also can't believe we have to look like we're defending a career politician like Pelosi lol
I'm super late to replying but she was talking about Russia trying to interfere with the election which sparked an investigation and senate hearing. It was then public that yes they didDid pelosi state the conclusion (her opinion) before the investigation was complete? Yes. Wheres the integrity there? How does that not undermine the integrity of democracy?
2016 "our election was hijacked! Protect the integrity of our democracy!"
2020
*Trump does the same*
"Trump won't accept the outcome! Protect the integrity of our democracy!"
I feel like this is pretty clear cut lol
Not at all to the extent her and all the Dems claimed in order to run with the narrative trying to delegitimize his presidency that ppl still believe to this dayI'm super late to replying but she was talking about Russia trying to interfere with the election which sparked an investigation and senate hearing. It was then public that yes they did
It's been years since I watched the senate hearing. I remember the dems were saying he was allied with Russia and they were tampering with the election or whatever words they usedNot at all to the extent her and all the Dems claimed in order to run with the narrative trying to delegitimize his presidency that ppl still believe to this day
While crying about protecting the integrity of democracy
It's been years since I watched the senate hearing. I remember the dems were saying he was allied with Russia and they were tampering with the election or whatever words they used
A bunch of govt agencies talked about it and it went public that yes they did try to and they try to every year. I think they also mentioned other nations try to and we do the same to other nations but honestly can't recall specifics
So technically she was right on both accounts. I guess you can argue how small or meager the results were but both times did happen
I'm a tad confused. Are you only specifically arguing that Trump didn't commit a crime with Russia in regards to interfering with the election? Because even that says they couldn't clear the president of improper behavior regarding Russia. So he was doing some shiesty shit but they couldn't charge him with a crimeView attachment 1332128AP FACT CHECK: Trump's exaggerations about the Russia probe
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump is taking his interpretation of special counsel Robert Mueller's Russia investigation well beyond the facts.apnews.com
"Insufficient evidence to prosecute a crime" but doesn't clear wrongdoing.I'm a tad confused. Are you only specifically arguing that Trump didn't commit a crime with Russia in regards to interfering with the election? Because even that says they couldn't clear the president of improper behavior regarding Russia. So he was doing some shiesty shit but they couldn't charge him with a crime