Countering "what about" from the GOP with another "what about" from the DEMS proves nothing substantive, it cannot be considered as a defense argument in a trial in a court of law, but it is a nifty way to call out flagrant hypocrisy and false equivalencies. Two can play this game, President Biden may choose not to play, but his surrogates can. It is DC hardball in the battle for public opinion... Here are some of the most obvious on my "what about list".
GOP: What about Hunter using his status as the VP's son to get rich:
DEMS: What about Kushner et al. and the $2 billion Saudi investment fund deal generating a management fee of $25 million to Kushner a year from the Saudis two weeks after Trump left office https://www.bing.com/search...
GOP: What about Hunter getting a slap on the hand for not paying taxes. Pleading guilty to a misdemeanor is no big deal; lock him up. This is an example of unequal treatment.
DEMS: What about Hunter having paid back as restitution the $million plus in taxes (he did) before also getting a criminal charge to which he had to plead guilty. (He did). More often, those who pay back are not charged with a crime.per former federal prosecutors. Yes, sons are treated differently than their presidential or VP fathers. In this case, Hunter got it harsher than others.
GOP: What about the FBI being used as a political weapon against political opponents.
DEMS: what about the FBI scuttling Hillary's election, with the letter ten days before the election reopening the email server case. https://fivethirtyeight.com/.../the-comey-letter.../
Those who claimed the DOJ and the FBI are weaponized tools of the Biden crime family and that the DOJ and FBI should be independent of the Oval Office, consider this: Aside from both the Durham report or the Inspector General finding no evidence of a deep state in the DOJ or FBI, Trump has promised to eliminate any independence of the DOJ or the FBI and he would appoint them to go after the "Bidens".. and the p deep state.https://news.yahoo.com/radical-strategy-behind-trump-promise-114124088.html Those who cannot see the hypocrisy, ill logic, contradictions, or humor in Trump's promised use of the DOJ for his retribution campaign v.the pious goal of an independent DOJ or FBI are tone deaf
GOP: What about the FBI being used by Biden as a political weapon against Trump in the Mar A Lago document indictment?
DEMS: What about the pictures? What about the recordings and issues of the attempt to fool his own attorney? etc. (Indictment has a wealth of other" what about" besides just these)
GOP: What about Trump being treated worse than anyone else in FBI action for taking home documents critical to national security?
DEMS: What about the two chances the FBI gave Trump to return the documents, his hiding them, his lying about them? What about the long list of those in government in jail who even pleaded guilty? Here is a list of eleven recent cases: FBI, Justice Department Routinely Prosecute Misuse of Classified Documents (voanews.com). Many were not even given the same chances to comply as Trump was. Pence's case was closed. He gave them back; he didn't lie or hide them like Trump did. The Biden case is hung up in the House Oversight Committee in a spitting match between the committee chair and the FBI. House Oversight leaders clash after viewing FBI document on Biden allegations | The Hill
One rather effective use of What Abouts is to put up a theory and then set about to find the proof. (If you think what Trump's kids did was bad, just look at Hunter Biden, why he is part of the Biden crime family). Accusing first, hunting for the proof later, is putting a cart before the horse, and is particularly embarrassing when the proof poofs as the alleged proof somehow disappears. Republicans Admit They ‘Don’t Know’ if Biden Bribery Tapes ‘Really Exist’ (msn.com) In the meantime, the die-hard partisans consider any plausibility as the same as evidence or proof. When these hashed and rehashed "what abouts" are still posed as the truth, the response should be "What about the lack of evidence, court decisions, etc.". Comer Admits Nobody Has Heard From Alleged Biden Informant for Three Years (msn.com) Even the unspoken get spoken and reveals to intent to keep on hunting Hunter (there must be something there and we will keep on looking) when the Committee chair's response to the disappearing evidenc, admits publicly the purpose of the committee is to keep on digging for dirt until they find something. GOP lawmakers vow to continue investigating Hunter Biden | CNN Politics
The granddaddy of the What Abouts of course, is the claim the election was stolen, as the GOP presented what they saw as evidence. and theories. 63 federal court judges and the Supreme Court looked at the What Abouts and ruled and dismissed the accusations for lack of evidence. At least three "forensic audits" came also found was never enough evidence to overturn the election results, and in fact, errors were found that favored the Biden vote instead of the Trump vote. Last week, some tapes were reported as evidence that Biden was bribed per a telephone conversation. Those "tapes" appear to be lost and the GOP committee chairs had to admit. it.
Another GOP approach is What About Democrats weaponizing the DOJ to go after Biden's enemies, a deep state plot and the Mueller investigation into Russian interference in the 2016 election.This one the GOP used as an excuse to investigate the investigators,
The DEM response: What about the failure of Durham to find any "deep state" plot? durham report may 23 findings summarized - Search (bing.com)
.
No comments:
Post a Comment