An explicit quid pro quo? No. But conservatives argued - properly so - that when Obama mused aloud about siccing the IRS on political opponents or prejudged that Hillary had done nothing indictable, he didn't have to be 100% explicit for it to be bad. Apply the same logic here.
-
-
Fine. Thanks.
-
What other people do in a system based on precedent and norms is irrelevant, hmmm yes.
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.