Why do you ask me to write when you already wrote a long response to it? It's not like I was going to write more about it.

There is that Solomon was demoted from vice president of The Hill to "opinion contributor" after lacking rigor in his news reporting. And "The views expressed by contributors are their own and not the view of The Hill". I'm not reading his "hundreds of pages" now, though. Please enlighten us on the truth of the matter.

On another note: "The Ukrainians weren't made aware that the assistance was being delayed/reviewed until more than one month after the call." Is this one true, or not?

I had a better opinion of Biden than Trump until this scandal came up, maybe you can help clear him up for us. I mean, that video is very damaging. Some say it's out of context and others had asked him to ask Ukraine to fire the prosecutor.

Why should I do all the work, while you act like a dummy? Posting articles from far right people, or sites, who are openly partisan, don't make you look bright.

You know how many time I come across far right sites that claim to have damaging information on a Democrat (Obama being a favorite), only for it to turn out to be fake, or over hyped? They are more inference than objective. They make the Trump Ukraine call summary seem like a damning confession of corruption.

But at least you solved one mystery, while creating more. How did Solomon get a hold of these hundreds of secret memos from Ukraine? Wait... I remember reading something about some of these Trump supporting investigators that claimed that Ukraine had dirt on the Bidens, and that they had access to them, and they turned out to be a bunch of con-men. hmm...

I also read some of these memos - at least the links in the Solomon article. They didn't make much sense - and who were some of these people with connection to Clinton's, and why were they important? And some some of the linked pages weren't even translated, while Solomon was making some claim about them, even though you couldn't confirm it unless you read Ukrainian.

So, the ball is in your court. I just laid out a few glaring problems, not all, that I had with the article. If you want to continue to act dumb, acepting what some partisan guy claimed in the article, then it just shows how gullible you are.

That was based on the word of a reporter, which even the article says "if true". Common sense would dictate that if we have been giving aid for the last several years to protect them from Russia taking them over, then they were expecting it at some point. And both Trump and the Ukraine president understood each other, because Ukraine was desperate for that aid, and pissing off Trump was something they didn't want to do that might jeopardize that aid - The Ukraine president even said he stayed at Trump tower, in an effort to further appease him

Yes, and that is common knowledge. What is your point again? You do know that Ukraine was one of the most corrupt countries in the world, right? And the Obama administration wanted guarantees that the loans and aid wouldn't mysteriously disappear, or be misused.

You're also partisan. The simple fact that you accuse sites of being wrong just for being right makes you partisan. Stephen Colbert that you like to reference is also partisan. Everyone is partisan, and nobody cares about it anymore.

How many retractions CNN, NYT and the notorious Buzzfeed had in the last year?

The ball is in everybody's court. You're probably right on this one. I also read a little of the memos, but would probably have to read everything to make something of them. It's just news. If false, it will die out. If it's true, it will pick up. Maybe Tucker will boost it up without looking into it, it sucks when they do that, left or right. I'm also guilty of that, but at least here we can talk about it. We have to look to the bottom of every single story. That Solomon story came from Tim Pool. He praises himself as being smart and good at research, he just lost a bit of my respect now. I wanted to see a debate between you and him, maybe you can start an Youtube channel? Go to Joe Rogan?

So the aid didn't even matter. Ukraine would do anything we ask them even if we had already given the aid.

I don't think firing the prosecutor was enough guarantee. My point is all this looks suspicious, and 'reporters' like Solomon, Tucker, and Tim Pool don't help one bit.

At 9/28/19 12:36 AM, EdyKel wrote:

It's possible to save the image and translate with this website. It appears that the scribd Ukrainian text in the Hill article is the same as the first link.

You can disagree, but please keep it civil, Edy.

At 9/28/19 12:36 AM, EdyKel wrote:

I watched Tim Pool's video again and read this particular memo. The first time I did I was working and listening in the background so I didn't pay close attention.

At first Tim doesn't focus much on Solomon's article, but more on the memos themselves.

It's basically the prosecutor saying (under oath?) he created anti-corruption entities in the government and everything was good until he refused to stop investigating Burisma, then was fired (and Biden seemed very eager to fire him in his video).

If the memos are true, then it doesn't have much to do with what Solomon says.

There is also this article about Biden starting to visit Ukraine a little while before the time Hunter started working for Burisma. Also, why was Hunter hired by Burisma in the first place?

Then a CIA agent was the leaker, and a CIA agent joined Burisma a little while after Hunter did. This might be a little conspiratorial, though.

Can you disprove all this? I'm kind of with Tim Pool again, all this looks really suspicious for Biden. And from multiple sources. I can't verify everything, though.

OMG, I am so partisan that I have been called a Nazi and a communist, by both sides - I didn't know you could be both at the same time...

I've been called a lot of things by both sides, because I have argue with both sides. That is where I often stand. And you are in no position to accuse people of being partisan, not when you exaggerated where people are with your communist and Nazi comparisons. And this partisan argument can be easily used against you.

I know my biases, and I know the biases of what I post, and how far they are on the political spectrum, with some further than others. And if it too partisan, I will say so. Colbert is not that far from the center.

But none of this changes the fact that you posted far right sites, and people, whose job it is is to stick there noses so far up Trump's ass to defend him to the point they walk around with shit on them while accusing the other side of the same shit they are defending Trump against - flagrant hypocrisy is a huge problem among very partisan sites and people. And you should read up on the NY post.

Mistakes are one thing, partisan nonsense is another.

I don't debate, or argue, to win, or to do it for publicity and money. I do these things for my own reasons. To have my arguments challenged. To learn and understand. To promote/defend my views, and my interests. Ect. And they are mostly selfish reasons. And I also have certain pet peeves that dictate my actions in these topics.

The aid does matter, since they are still, technically, in a civil war with pro-Russian factions. But pissing Trump off, the president of one of the most powerful countries in the world, is one of the worst things you can do, especially for a small country like Ukraine.

One of the articles that the Solomon article linked to had the following:

Robert Weissman, the president of progressive watchdog group Public Citizen and a frequent critic of business dealings by President Donald Trump's children -- including the Trump Organization's ongoing development projects overseas -- told ABC News that it can be challenging for the adult children of well-known political figures to carve out careers that don't pose ethics concerns, but he considers Hunter Biden's decisions concerning.

"At absolute minimum there's a huge appearance of conflict, and there's every reason to think that the investors that he‘s working with want him partnering with them because he's the son of the then-vice president and now presidential candidate," Weissman said. "[Joe Biden] should have encouraged his son to not take these positions."

That should answer why Hunter was hired, to try to be on good terms with his father. It's why both Biden's claim that they don't discus work with each other, because that would compromise each other's positions.

I'm still looking for the "HUNDREDS OF PAGES of Documents Implicating Hunter Biden in Ukrainian Scandal"

So far, it's mostly a few dozen pages, mostly from the fired Ukrainian prosecutor. Or stuff over the far right bogeyman, George Soros.

That is his view of things, but what did he have to show for it for 4 years, other than just claims? Did he send anyone to jail? Did he break up some corruption ring? Strangely, you don't see any one defending him by pointing out his actual accomplishments, in one of the most corupt countries in the world. And Biden was not the only one unhappy about the prosecutor, other domestic and international organizations were unhappy with him as well. Even his Deputy Prosecutor quite, accusing his office of being corupt and lawless.

I think the article explains why: "his last name."

This is one huge grey area. Foreign countries will often hire Americans who are connected to powerful people, or have government experience and know how to navigate that system. It's the same reasons why most politicians find cushy jobs as corporate lobbyists after serving in government. There is nothing illegal about this, and it doesn't mean it's outright corruption either - even if it looks bad, and is suspicious

What is corruption, for example, is many of the people who worked for Trump in his campaign, or cabinet, had lobbyist connections to Ukraine, but lied about their connections to congress or the FBI, or to the special console - with many of them being prosecuted by Robert Mueller.

I ignore political commentator as much as much as I can. Sometimes they can offer interesting facts, and ideas, but most of them will spin those facts out of control by focusing too much on them, or other minor details, to spin an elaborate conspiracy for partisan reasons.

You also have to look for patterns. For example, the biggest claims against Biden in Ukraine are from fired prosecutors there, who are contradicted by people who knew them.

I never said I'm not partisan, I clearly said "Everyone is partisan". How come you can read my mind but can't read what I write.

You don't tolerate any kind of accusation towards the left, and is always attacking only the right. All of your posts are like this, aside from the occasional defense of Trump. You seem to dislike moderates more than Trump.

Stephen Colbert, Jimmy Kimmel Viewed as Most Liberal Late-Night Hosts, Poll Finds

According to mediabiasfactcheck, the Hill is actually left leaning. But it seems that you consider anything that is not far left as far right.

So it's a mistake when it comes from the left, and partisan when it comes from the right.

If you don't debate to win, then why did you say that the ball is in my court?

The only issue I see with this is that Hunter doesn't speak Russian. Going specifically to Ukraine looks very suspicious.

Actually, not much more than a dozen. And Steele stuff.

Shokin showed video of Ihor Mosiichuk allegedly demanding bribes for his political services. The previous prosecutor, Vitalii Yarema, also accomplished next to nothing. I've been part of politics a few times, my guess is in these circles if you accomplish something you're kicked out. As happened to Kasko. It's a corruption infestation, and kicking Shokin out wouldn't scratch the problem. Politics is the same everywhere. Though Shokin was investigating Burisma.

It's just conspiracies.

Agree that many people around Trump are corrupt, including himself.

Aside from Stephen Colbert? He's not just a comedian.

That's true. It's also possible that both Shokin and Biden are corrupt. Biden should have called Obama when he refused to give the aid, but maybe he was just being overconfident.

This scandal might actually be good for Biden. He seemed a bit slow before, now he's more on the offensive.

Uh, huh... I read just fine, I just don't like your flippancy and gimmicks to get out of trouble for saying outright stupid shit, like your partisan, or bias, or everyone is bias. I called you out for constantly using far right sites, and people, to back up your argument. Don't deflect, and try to make it about me.

Again, you compare people to Stalin communists and Nazis. So, what do you know about moderates, when you are constantly creating false equivalences. To you what is worse is as equal to rumors - all politicians are corupt. Trump is as bad as you can get, and you don't have to be on any political spectrum to know that. Hell, Fox news is fighting itself between the right and far right.

It also doesn't change the fact that Trump basically released damning evidence against himself, because he has a different interpretation of what is wrong, while you hold rumors as equal value to outright corruption. You need fucking evidence, and reliable witnesses, for that to stand. The only reason I grudgingly came to his defense over the Russia thing is that there is no concert evidence that ties him to collusion with Russia, yet.

Son, that is a public opinion poll. Take the political test and post the results. I'm sure you will give multiple excuses for not taking it - and if you do brave it don't always hit the center answer, because that make you look fake.

Oh, now you are trying to read my mind... And I specifically wrote "site, and people"(multiple times). Solomon comes under "people".

You are the one who said "right. I didn't say that. I might lean that way, but I have seen plenty on the left do the same thing, including Cobert. But that don't change the fact that what he said in this case was more right on than the far right on Biden.

*If you want to continue this shit, then take it to the centrist topic. I am done with it here.

Because it's your turn to back up your claim, after I poked holes in it in the 1st and 2nd round. We are now in the 5th round, and you are still using questionable witnesses, and claims of evidence, too support your claim against Biden? While not being able to exactly say what the corruption is against him is. All you can argue is "It's suspicious", which don't mean a whole since that can be used against anyone for any action you don't like.

And you spend more time talking about Hunter Biden, instead of Trump, in a topic specifically about Trump. Can you say off topic, and deflection? You are trying to create a false equivalency to claim that a centrist is just as bad as a partisan hack like Trump, who pretty much purged himself every time he tweets, or talks. That is all I am reading from you.

One possible minor act alone does not atone for doing nothing, while being accused of lawless and corruption, or ignoring it, in a country known for corruption.

And the article describes it as "video evidence was demonstrated allegedly showing Radical Party National Deputy Ihor Mosiichuk demanding bribes for his political services".

While a few paragraphs down "Mr. Shokin’s legacy also includes deceiving the public, including Western diplomats", and few more paragraph down "The biggest scandal marring Mr. Shokin’s tenure involved his alleged sabotage of the reformers’ attempts to arrest and prosecute the so-called “diamond prosecutors.”

Did you actually read the article, because it's not a glowing testament to Shokin, or did you just get the link from a far right site? Stop defending the guy, and trying to compare him to Biden on even less.

Like yours on Biden.

Son, the whistle blower on Trump certainly had opinion on what is right and wrong, for why he acted. And the only time I occasionally watch a segment of Colbert is when I read an article about something he said on Yahoo News. I don't watch him otherwise.

Really? So, you support what Trump did, then? So far, all I see is you trying to get rid a centrist candidate with a salacious conspiracy, so it just leads to Trump, or Sanders, for the presidency. You must of never heard of how rumors have easily taken down political candidates before.

And you use far left sites to backup your arguments, like Stephen Colbert. I think even I referenced Colbert. This "far something site" argument holds no water.

Hating communism and nazism is common sense. Is it a rumor that Shokin was investigating Burisma? I remember you defended Trump when I called him a nazi.

I took it some time ago, it said I'm center right.

I didn't deny that I use right-wing sources some times, you just picked Solomon out of many.

That's fine, I'm afraid I couldn't understand what you wrote here anyway.

Biden fired Shokin when Shokin was investigating Biden's son. This is fact. What is questionable is if Biden was told to do this, since he didn't call Obama. To me it looks just as bad as Trump's recent scandal, but you will always protect Biden no matter what.

Trump called for an investigation into Biden, Biden's case is directly related to Trump's. You are the one who started arguing with me about it, I'm just replying to you. Your love for Biden knows no bounds, and anyone who dares say something even remotely bad about him must be thoroughly shammed. Yes I think Biden is as bad as Trump, except for his policies on pollution.

He was investigating Burisma. People are shades of grey, nobody is completely evil or completely good. Or you might as well just throw the whole Ukrainian government in the garbage.

He fired Shokin while he was investigating Burisma, without calling Obama. It looks bad, just like Trump's scandal. They look equally bad to me. You can call it a false equivalence as much as you want.

I have no idea why you mention the whistleblower here.

No I don't. Biden's mistakes were known before Trump's scandal.

I also posted dirt on Trump, was I trying to get rid of him then? When I speak badly of him I don't read any complains from you. I also spoke badly of Bernie, Warren, and Buttigieg. Maybe I do this because deep inside I don't want any of them to be president. I still think Biden is the best option, but I'm obviously not as much in love with him as you seem to be. You're probably right, though. I shouldn't post dirt on him. But that would be working as partisan for the left, and I really don't like that.

@valken666

To sum up your argument, you used a bunch of far right sites to support some conspiracy, who relied on memos you even admitted went nowhere, while arguing that a bunch of corupt officials, who constantly lied, are evidence of some suspicious activity by Biden... Then accusing me of being worse, or equally bad - and the only source you used that wasn't partisan was the Ukraine media site. Another false equivalency. I doubt you have ever voted for a Democrat, while I have always voted for both Republicans, and Democrats, for almost 25 years, now, preferring moderates and centrists.

Biden fired Shokin when Shokin was investigating Biden's son. What is questionable is if Biden was told to do this, since he didn't call Obama

Wrong, try again. You don't have anything to back that up with.

Trump called for an investigation into Biden, Biden's case is directly related to Trump's. You are the one who started arguing with me about it, I'm just replying to you. Your love for Biden knows no bounds, and anyone who dares say something even remotely bad about him must be thoroughly shammed. Yes I think Biden is as bad as Trump, except for his policies on pollution.

Biden is centrist, Trump is far right. You just argued that I am partisan, and acused me of using far left sites (plural) when I brought up one center left person. Trump admitted he was behind a conspiracy, Biden hasn't. There is less proof/evidence of a conspiracy of the latter than the former. This is your confusing reasoning at work.

Hating communism and nazism is common sense. Is it a rumor that Shokin was investigating Burisma? I remember you defended Trump when I called him a nazi.

Comparing people to the worst in history, when they haven't committed those types of atrocities, is an exaggerations, and dishonest. And then you say the following contradiction:

People are shades of grey, nobody is completely evil or completely good.

The one true thing there is, but you just argued the exact opposite for Sanders and Trump, painting them as black and white with your communist and Nazi exaggerations. So, not only are you a hypocrite in this regard, your argument comes off as a desperate attempt to give credence to some very corupt individuals so you can use them to back up your flimsy conspiracy, and false equivalency, against a moderate like Biden.

Yeah, I am pretty much doen with you in thi stopic, unless you have something more tangible that doesn't come from a far spectrum site, and isn't a far right talking point

So you prefer Russian sites as reference?

An Yahoo article by "By Polina Ivanova and Pavel Polityuk". They're just journalists, that's your own argument you used against me when I pointed "The Ukrainians weren't made aware that the assistance was being delayed/reviewed until more than one month after the call." And they even have Russian surnames. You can't believe the Russians only when convenient.

Even if Shokin lied, it still doesn't look good for Biden.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tc2gGEAeIHU

I never said Trump or Bernie are completely evil. And I never said Trump is Hitler or Bernie is Stalin. I think you're guilty of everything you accuse me of. Bernie waves red flags and you say he's not a communist.

Even Bill Maher admits it looks bad for Biden. Some things are best to just admit or ignore and move on. Left wing media only harmed themselves with all the Trump derangement syndrome, even if they were right many times. When you defend someone excessively, people become wary.

At least apparently you realised that this discussion is doing exactly what claim to not want, that is, spreading dirt about Biden.

Have you actually looked at the people involved in the the Trump Ukraine scandal - I already posted two of the characters involved in it. And this also involves Trump's own lawyer, who circumvented legit channels to try and get Ukraine to go after Biden - cloak and dagger shit. And trump was trying to hide the call by having it on put on a wrong sever. This is a textbook case of lawlessness and corruption. And you are telling me we should trust people like this, and in Ukraine?

And Ukraine are not Russians, it's what they are fighting against in their civil war. Do you not know anything about the history of Ukraine?

Also, the National review is a right to far right site. And I already went over aid package that they were expecting, because they had been receiving it for the last 5 years or so, annually - and Trump even bragged about giving more aid to them. Trump gave them no indication he would stop the aid. And if you were just caught saying you would do a favor to Trump, would you admit that it was for the aid? Use your head.

You are still protecting things you can't protect with Trump, while going after even less with Biden

I already pointed out what was said in two articles on this page, one from a far right site, about Biden son's decision to accept a position at the Ukraine oil company that might seem to conflict with his father's position over Ukraine, and the reason they hired him (Hunter). As a progressive watchdog said" "[Joe Biden] should have encouraged his son to not take these positions."

And rumors of some corruption, true or not, is what Trump wanted. He wanted to hurt Biden any way he could, because Biden was beating him in the polls in battleground states. It was not out of some civic duty to expose corruption that you are arguing for. It was about Trump own self serving interests. Trump wanted exposure, even if he had to break the law, and act corupt, to do so. But he got caught, because someone betrayed him because they had some moral or lawful standings. This is how things stand, no matter how you troll out of loyatyto the right, it wont change what Trump did is a 1000x worse than a rumor about Biden.

I said Trump is as bad as Biden, I never said you should trust him.

All you can think is in terms of binary/partisan, either I'm helping Trump or Biden. But that doesn't matter since Warren is projected to win the nomination.

That's an opinion. Look how close they're to Russia, and they were obedient to the Kremlin just 5 years ago. Now they're obedient to us? You yourself claimed they're full of corruption and sold out to Trump. But now that it's convenient you're willing to take help from them.

Your link doesn't work.

So Ukraine is corrupt, and you had Hunter working there, and Biden in the middle of it all. Doesn't look good. But you will say anything to claim it looks good, that's the crux of the matter. You will not bend on saying it looks good for Biden, and that I can't agree. We will talk forever until this changes.

What am I protecting about Trump? I'm not protecting anyone, only you are. That's the whole discussion here, you're protecting Biden. You made all kinds of excuses for his son working at Burisma, because you want Biden to be perfectly clean.

So you're claiming that Trump planned the leak to get exposure, and got betrayed with the leak at the same time? Which is it? You're trying so hard to attack Trump that you're contradicting yourself and helping him here. I almost don't want to say this because I don't want to help Trump in any way shape or form. For your own good, and the good of the left and Biden, you need to calm down with the Trump derangement syndrome.

You're not neutral about Biden so you saying it's 1000x worse can be taken as a grain of salt. This exaggeration doesn't help you.

I don't even want to attack Biden. Why don't we go back to attacking Trump?

At 9/29/19 02:12 PM, valken666 wrote:

Lots of nonsense and exagerations..... lot's of excuses.... still making false equivalencies.... bad reading comprehension... still defending far right Trump over indefendsible and pretty transparent lawlessness an corruption , while attacking centrist like Biden over rumors after attacking others for being partisan....

There is nothing new, or worth a second look in your post....

https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2019/09/25/what-you-need-to-know-about-the-us-aid-package-to-ukraine-that-trump-delayed/

Are you deflecting? I thought you didn't like deflections. Is it not a false equivalence and exaggeration when you say Biden is 1000x better than Trump?

Did I defend Trump about any of those links you posted? I'm glad there is a new investigation on him and hope he gets arrested if found guilty. I just can't say Biden is clean, as Bill Maher, but you can't take that about your beloved Biden.

Interesting article that ask the question: Did Trump enlist the help of other government agencies to go after Biden?

And Trump's white nationalist advisor, Stephen Miller, goes on a conspiracy rant with Fox News, Chris Wallace, arguing that the whistle blower is part of a deep state, and that Trump is the actual whistle blower. Chris Wallace was having none of that.

Trump, after watching some preacher on Fox News, tweeted that his removal would lead to a civil war.

Trump suggested that the Democrat chair of the House intelligence committee, Adam Schiff, should be arrested for treason for the impeachment probe against him.

Former chief of staff John Kelly had a heck of a time keeping Trump from giving out sensitive information to world leaders.

Trump had to off the book lawyers working to pressure Ukraine on Biden, according to Fox News

It's the opposite. Kicking Trump out would avert civil war. He's hallucinating. He thinks millions would give their lives to keep him there, in reality nobody would.

It's looking to be more like Trump has been trying to get other countries to help him go after his political rivals, and those who wronged him, using his position as president and through government agencies and off the book people.

Beside the Ukraine scandal, Trump also talked to the Prime Minister of Australia, with his Attorney General contacting British intelligence officials, both looking for information to discredit the Mueller report. And, apparently, His Secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, was listening on Trump's Ukraine call.

Trump tweeted ‘billions of dollars’ would be saved on military contracts. Then the Pentagon fired the official doing that.

Long live the swamp. Trump 2020

Trump signs $1.8 billion bill for funding autism research/programs.

Senate shuts down Trump ATF nominee. Excuse me while I smug.

Nominated by a president you support, and who has done the most on gun control in recent years on the federal level.

Trump is too volatile to have a stable gun policy.

His lawyer is taking over Fox News, soon it should be called Giuliani News Network. He's going nuts.

Rush Limbaugh, a far right firebrand, use to promote small government and free market, until he became a Trump supporter. Now he is lashing out at Fox News, claiming it's anti-Trump, becuaes of recent infighting over Trump's Ukraine scandal. Why do I feel happy about all this?

On another note, Trump inspires people, even in the police department, as a chief of it, to let out their inner racist. "Trump Is 'Last Hope for White People,' Said Police Chief on Trial" And he's on trial for slamming a black, 19 year old, head in a door-jam.

lol the bump stock ban which the ATF just admitted they have the lack of authority since its Congress's express job, they're still legal bud, and 3D print files are still out in the wild. then there's his Supreme Court justices are going to be hearing a case in December on whether or not carrying a firearm extends outside of the door, which possibly means 50 state constitutional carry, and there were Senate Dems who wrote an amicus curea brief telling them to vote their way or else face possible "Supreme Court reform" on the basis NY changed the law already, but they accepted it anyway because a blue state screwed up the law and then threatened them.

I'm not worried about Trump or his Gun control position because he's just as powerless as Obama was when he was in office on the issue.

And more fuel for gun advocates emerges.

Trump urges Ukraine and China to probe Bidens

Also this.

The slow motion dumpster fire is eternal and everlasting.

So, the whole Ukraine scandal seemed to have a lot to do with Trump listening to fake news (conspiracy theories) by conservative commentators, which aids in the US State Department, under Mike Pompeo, warned against taking seriously, but were pursued non the less by the Trump administration. The conspiracy that was pursued argued that Ukraine was under the influence of Democrats, and left leaning figures, who were using it to sway the 2016 election against Trump, in favor of Hillary Clinton, by creating false information that Russia was behind the 2016 election interference to help elect Trump.

And, I am assuming, that Biden involvement there was just a mark of opportunity to go after a political opponent to, which exceeded the executive's Branch authority, and placed the DOJ and the US State Department in a very compromised position that made them into accomplices in a conspiracy for partisan reasons - and breaking the law, especially if any one of them pressured anyone in these countries to do something for them in exchange for something.