CarryOn wrote:
"Trump stated there was no quid pro quo" .... No, that is not the reason.
This sham investigation has been going on for weeks now with shifty and the dems claiming "quid pro quo" in spite of Trump's denial. The accusation changed from "quid pro quo" to "bribery" on Thursday .... after the focus group tested the waters on "messaging."
"Citing two people familiar with the results, the [Washington] Post said, 'the focus group found "bribery" to be most damning.'" Note that is not a consensus of what they thought actually took place based on any evidence, but what sounded worse to them.
So why did they change it? "NBC News and Reuters warned Democrats they needed to capture the attention of the American people in the public hearings this week if they wanted to move opinion regarding President Trump."
On Sunday, Rep. Himes said on NBC news that it was "probably best not to use Latin words" to describe Trump's behavior ... and on Thursday (after the focus group results), he said "bribery" was a more useful term. But then he said that trading "quid pro quo" for "bribery" might describe Trump's actions less accurately.
So, it was not at all about Trump stating no quid pro quo ... it was not at all about what he actually did, IF he actually did anything wrong .... or something definite they can charge him with and prove ... it was only about finding the most damaging message they can in order to sway public opinion in their direction.
.... All of which only proves they have nothing ... cuz if they did, none of these kinds of shenanigans would be necessary. They could simply show clear and convincing evidence of guilt .,..... instead of opinion, innuendo, second-, third-, and fourth-hand sources, and polling for the most effective wording to use on potential offenses, etc., etc., etc. ... write up the articles of impeachment and v**e ...
.... but here we are ....
"Trump stated there was no quid pro quo"... (
show quote)
So what would you like to call it?... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extortion