5 ms·
Sure, i don’t doubt there’s work on the Dem side when it comes to abuse of power. >in the last 4 years I’m talking 30 years. The last 4 years are just end res
by intended 6y ago
Sure, i don’t doubt there’s work on the Dem side when it comes to abuse of power.
>in the last 4 years
I’m talking 30 years. The last 4 years are just end results of other forces.
Also - america has never produced an event like the trump presidency. Does that feature when we discuss abuse of power in the last 4 years?
I know of no Democrat action that is comparable.
- cm2187 6y agoThe use by Obama of the FBI to investigate his political opponent during a presidential campaign, on a basis of an improbable opposition research report is unprecedented and to say the least, controversial. Imagine the outrage if any republican president had done that. Not saying this is only the last 4 years. I agree, at least 30 years. But no, it is not the action of a single party.
- vlovich123 6y agoWas there any indication this was Obama directing the FBI to behave this way, or that this was an established pattern of behavior? There’s a very important difference between a mistake or an error in judgement vs an established pattern of behavior and engagement of illicit behavior by the president himself (as with Trump offering a pardon to Assange to deny ties to Russia in the DNC hack after failing to have Ukraine fallaciously smear Biden).
- cm2187 6y ago"You can't prove it" isn't a terribly convincing defense.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- singemonkey 6y agoI always thought that "you can't prove it" was a very good defence? Isn't the burden of proof generally on the accuser? I'm not a lawyer, so I'm unfamiliar with the nitty-gritty of legalities.
- vlovich123 6y agoMaking insinuations and accusations without any kind of evidence is even less convincing, no?