This is the framing that makes most sense. Every conversation between leaders is quid pro quo by its nature, so It is dumb to "look for it." The only salient question is whether the public would benefit by the information the president was requesting. We do. Next hoax, please. https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1194214568001724416 …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays
Everyone already understands that leaders engage in quid pro quo’s. What is abusive is the favor he asked and what he clearly withheld until caught. Is there any possible chance the American people could benefit? That is your bar?
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MattTW
You wouldn’t want to know if the next president (per the polls) is beholden to Ukraine?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays
If what he was doing was in the public interest and ethical, why didn’t he stick to his guns and continue to hold back the aid until Ukraine announced they were going to investigate the Biden’s on CNN, as he was demanding? The framing falls apart, he behaved as if guilty.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MattTW
Given that the quid pro quo is irrelevant, why does it matter?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @ScottAdamsSays
It goes to frame of mind. He wasn’t doing it in the public interest and he knew it was unethical. If it is so vital to the national interest and he knew he was in the right, double down and stick to the demands, keep the aid back until he got what he wanted. He folded.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It isn’t a one-variable world. He also needs to help Ukraine. He asked them for assistance and probably got some extra cooperation. An announcement is less important. Compromise.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.