Marener
Platinum Member
- Jul 26, 2022
- 28,519
- 13,373
The facts have yet to show any actual quid pro quo. You have every opportunity to introduce any fact you want, but fail to do so.Facts have been spelled out, you are looking for a conclusion prematurely…
Hardly. You guys have been promising evidence for years and so far has come up with vanishingly little.Projection
We need to know what influence was peddled. Hell, most of here transactions occurred after he left office, a fact that you guys are reluctant to admit to.Oh yeah sure…influence peddling is legitimate for you eh?
Unfortunately, there was also a 9-0 SCOTUS case that said influence peddling actually is quite legal. I don’t like it either but Congress does not seem in a hurry to fix that problem.
To be illegal, something of value has to be given in exchange for an “official act”. We need to know what that “official act” is.
Not at all. I have a clearly explained example with evidence and facts to back it up. You don’t seem to have that.lol…Nice double standard you have there…