So its okay to pay a foreign adversary to manufacture dirt on a political opponent, but its not okay to listen if its offered for free?

10 Answers

Relevance
  • Arch
    Lv 7
    6 months ago
    Favorite Answer

    Yeah ... that seems to be what The Left is saying.

    Look, the real issue here is that for Liberals, there are two completely different sets of rules. Keep in mind, Liberals are not actually CONSCIOUS of this fact. It's ENTIRELY subconscious. They apply these different sets of rules without even realizing they're switching back and forth between them.

    But there clearly is one set of rules for Liberal politicians (who are seen as good and noble defenders of whatever it is Liberals think needs defending) and another set for Conservative politicians (who are seen as tyrants who want to take teddy bears and blankies away from babies, sell them, and buy mansions for wealthy CEO's).

    So if it were the Clinton Campaign who said they'd listen if it were offered for free, Libs would not have a problem with it. And if Trump's campaign had paid money for dirt on Hillary, they'd be rioting in the streets.

  • 6 months ago

    This is how to do it as per Adam Schiff: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NxHrn6Byz3g

    Youtube thumbnail

  • 6 months ago

    That's how liberals think!! LOL!!

  • 6 months ago

    One is a campaign expense and is legal. The other is an illegal campaign contribution. It isn't that hard to understand for folks who are not members of Cult 45.

    • marsel_duchamp
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      It appears the Trump Tower meeting did not provide anything of value. This is about what Trump said and hypothetical and explaining the difference between an expenditure by a campaign and an illegal gift to a campaign or offer of such gift.

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • 6 months ago

    TIL that a Washington, DC-based consulting firm is a "foreign adversary".

  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    Page 2 of the mueller report shows no collusion. Yet libs keep bringing it up. Why? Is it part of their narrative?

    Attachment image
  • Anonymous
    6 months ago

    According to liberals it is okay if the money is first laundered through a private citizen. Money laundering makes it all okay right libs?

  • 6 months ago

    I still can't see evidence that Trump colluded or conspired with a government in any way.

  • 6 months ago

    Yeah, we should be able to manufacture our own dirt on politicians.

  • -j.
    Lv 7
    6 months ago

    Talking to private citizens who happen to be from another country is not the same as colluding with a foreign government.

    Not sure why this is so hard for conservatives to grasp.

    • graphicconception
      Lv 7
      6 months agoReport

      Even if you are talking to private citizens who have close ties to the Russian government? Who do you think Steele was talking to, exactly?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.