Reddit Image
Read More


  1. As a reminder, this subreddit [is for civil discussion.](/r/politics/wiki/index#wiki_be_civil)

    In general, be courteous to others. Debate/discuss/argue the merits of ideas, don’t attack people. Personal insults, shill or troll accusations, hate speech, **any** advocating or wishing death/physical harm, and other rule violations can result in a permanent ban.

    If you see comments in violation of our rules, please report them.

    For those who have questions regarding any media outlets being posted on this subreddit, please click [here]( to review our details as to whitelist and outlet criteria.


    *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/politics) if you have any questions or concerns.*

  2. They’ll strain to spin complex tinfoil webs of impropriety concerning their opponents. But when it concerns them, they become the densest, most deliberately obtuse people imaginable.

  3. “Castor refused even to concede that Trump had asked Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky to investigate the Bidens. For the record, here is the portion of the phone call between Trump and Zelensky in which Trump requested an investigation of the Bidens:

    “The other thing, There’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution, and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the attorney general would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution, so if you can look into it … It sounds horrible to me.”

    The Democratic lawyer displayed this passage and asked Castor, “President Trump was asking Ukrainian president Zelensky to have the Ukrainian officials ‘look into’ the Bidens, correct?”
    “I don’t think the record supports that … I think it’s ambiguous,” Castor insisted.”

    “Biden went around bragging…so if you can look into it”

    Where the fuck is the ambiguity?

  4. This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original]( reduced by 96%. (I’m a bot)
    > GOP Lawyer Denies Trump Even Wanted To Discredit Biden The House Republican impeachment defense of President Trump has been an experiment in pointillistic surrealism, in which disconnected pieces of information – some true, some false – are slushed together into a dreamlike haze in which nothing is certain.

    > "Would you agree that Joe Biden was a leading contender to face President Trump in 2020?," asked the Democratic lawyer.

    > Since the murderous cult leader, who died in 2017, was convicted of California state criminal charges, Trump couldn't issue him a pardon even if he wanted to.

    [**Extended Summary**]( | [FAQ]( “Version 2.02, ~448013 tl;drs so far.”) | [Feedback]( “PM’s and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome.”) | *Top* *keywords*: **Trump**^#1 **President**^#2 **Biden**^#3 **Castor**^#4 **us**^#5

  5. I’m sure that he is just following that tried and true legal tradition dating back to the origins of the GOP:


    ‘Habeo digitos in auribus haberem. La-la-la-la-la-la-la Habeo digitos in auribus haberem.’


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here