The decision re: witnesses in Trump’s impeachment illustrates the high levels of partisan polarization in the US. In other contexts, getting more evidence before a decision is common sense. But here, caing witnessed feels like a loss for republicans. And losing is... 1/4
They color our view of the world, but in a way that draws upon our deep desire for group belonging and survival. And at that level we’re all little more than apes who will fling feces at the other team even if doing so covers us in excrement as well. 4/4
-
-
Aren’t you even a bit curious how Biden’s son made millions through his dad’s association? A FOSSIL FUEL corporation no less? IF global warming is killing the planet is not it unconscionable that the Vice President’s son is feeding off the profits in a planet killing enterprise?
-
I don’t know what Biden did. I am curious. Let’s imagine that Biden was actually corrupt and that Trump was interested in trying to uncover the truth when dealing with Ukraine. If that’s the case, then why not release all the White House records? If they reflect Trump’s...
- Još 3 druga odgovora
Novi razgovor -
-
-
In a court of law, only direct participants in a conversation can testify to the conversation. Otherwise, its hearsay, and inadmissible. The transcript has been released. Both participants have spoken afterwards. None of the other “witnesses” an add anything except an opinion.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
Opinion isn’t factual.
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
-
-
So far, there’s only been 16-17 witnesses against the President, 0 for. How many do you think there should be?
Hvala. Twitter će to iskoristiti za poboljšanje vaše vremenske crte. PoništiPoništi
-
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.