Markk wrote:If you have truly followed this...then what is my position, and what are my "opponents" position. Give me a brief "conclusion" of each. Just generalize he overall position of my "opponents." This will be interesting to say the least.
You need to do your own work.
The problem you have with whining that no one is 'answering your questions' is that your questions are only a delay tactic designed to stand in for your lack of facts.
To demonstrate: if I told you that I have a picture of Joe Biden personally handing an aid check (not how that works anyway, but let's run with it) into the hand of the Ukrainian president, I'm
still going to ask you to give me any factoid or data nugget that demonstrates how Burisma received or profited from that check. But
you won't provide that. You'll just throw another distraction and baseless allegation out into the conversation.
You have the same problem with the question of
why Trump didn't ask the DoJ to investigate this supposed corruption - the same alleged corruption connection that
you say required investigation, but that
you claim Trump
didn't need to investigate, and that
you refuse to provide data or fact, to substantiate.
It's also why you can't tell me how you determine at what point that any particular level of pay to Hunter Biden, as a board member, moves his position from
legitimate, to
corrupt.
You won't dare to tackle these questions because it exposes that you have nothing here but unsupported accusations and partisan whining, fed to you by a book authored by a con man.
But, don't feel too bad about wasting your money on this book; the author has been doing this for years to a large number of folks in your voting cohort. Just move past that and answer the questions that I've asked above. After 30 pages of dodging, you've got to have
something relevant to say about them.
