Lurker > karlpilkington4

TheVipaGTS posted...

This is what Trump Lickers have resorted to? lmao

What is this post even suppose to mean?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

He even gave Candice Owens a sweet kiss on the cheek.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

"You're the champions for free thought and free speech"

But why would a so called racist attend this? *shrugs*


---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

markconigliaro posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

He didnt take selfies. He did a daily vlog back in 2017, and while doing his vlog in Japan they went into a forest where suicides have been known to happen. What is suppose to do, just not vlog that day? Before then, he vlogged once a day for like 300 days or something. They didn't go in there knowing a body would be there. He blurred the face, and he mentioned suicide awareness like 4 times in the video. His so called "laughter" was not about the body itself, it was a nervous laughter and use of comedy to relieve the tension of an uncomfortable situation, which many people do.

He had to pose and setup a picture for a thumbnail with a hanging body. Make sure Logan is on the right side of the frame with a shocked face, with the body shown clearly on the left side, snap picture, post as the thumbnail. The thumbnail didn't come from the video, that was a picture they setup and shot, they knew what they were doing.

And yes, they could have not vlogged, or they could have cut out the body and pretend like they never saw it. It wasn't a live video, they can edit whatever they want. They could have still had a suicide forest vlog without showing a body.

You may be right, the video was taken down in like a day, and I didnt see the thumbnail. Regardless,they blurred his face, and took the situation as serious as they could. There was nothing wrong with the video itself.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

pegusus123456 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

What is suppose to do, just not vlog that day

Yes.

Glad to help out your troubles with this issue.

It's not my troubles or my issue. Not sure what this post is suppose to prove.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

k debonair posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

That's completely untrue. Fair use is for everyone, not some vague segment of the population. I have no idea what your last sentence is suppose to even mean. It certainly doesn't apply to what this company did. They did exactly what fair use outlines - comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work

are you a lawyer, yes or no?

You obviously aren't. I'm a marketer, and I know all about fair use laws bud.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

My first reaction would be :

Wtf, I have a son?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

bobbaaay posted...

it's not surprising some people are defending this. It's absolutely trashy behavior on the company's behalf.

No one is defending what the company did, just the legality of it all. What posts are you reading?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

k debonair posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

It's called fair use law.

fair use generally only applies to individuals like journalists, comedians, historians, etc. A company in the business of marketing does not have the right to fair use when it makes new training materials and distributes them.

That's completely untrue. Fair use is for everyone, not some vague segment of the population. I have no idea what your last sentence is suppose to even mean. It certainly doesn't apply to what this company did. They did exactly what fair use outlines - comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

greatmonkeybaby posted...

thronedfire2 posted...

isn't that the guy who took selfies with the dead body of someone who hung themselves?

Oh damn ! That is pretty messed up

He didnt take selfies. He did a daily vlog back in 2017, and while doing his vlog in Japan they went into a forest where suicides have been known to happen. What is suppose to do, just not vlog that day? Before then, he vlogged once a day for like 300 days or something. They didn't go in there knowing a body would be there. He blurred the face, and he mentioned suicide awareness like 4 times in the video. His so called "laughter" was not about the body itself, it was a nervous laughter and use of comedy to relieve the tension of an uncomfortable situation, which many people do.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

ArchiePeck posted...

Guide posted...

Yes, she did, by making them public. The company is being shitty, but she made them public. Literally infinite copies of her photos for anyone to take and use as they please.

Uh, no that is not how copyright works.

If I take a photo and publish it on my facebook/instagram/whatever, you do not have the automatic right to republish it without my permission. It is my created work.

It's called fair use law.

In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and transformative purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. In other words, fair use is a defense against a claim of copyright infringement. If your use qualifies as a fair use, then it would not be considered an infringement.

https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Annihilated posted...

Even if that were true, no reasonable person would give half a shit about any of the stuff they found on her profile. They are not running for office, they are trying to help companies build their brand or sell their products and services.

That's your opinion. And if you own a company you have every right to use a certain criteria to hire, same as this company. A persons personality is highly relevant to many employers. And their social media accounts are fair game if its public.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Annihilated posted...

Guide posted...

Annihilated posted...

What a scummy company. That is pure sexism, plain and simple, and an invasion of privacy. This is exactly why you DON'T go snooping around on applicants' social media, because they are allowed to have a life outside of you.

It's weird to see you taking a seemingly further "left" position than I would, but it's not an invasion of privacy at all. All that shit is entirely public, for everyone to see.

That's a horseshit excuse for two reasons. 1. There is nothing on instagram that is relevant to the applicant's qualifications or the company's hiring process.

They are a marketing company, and knowing more about a person before you hire them in any industry is very relevant to an employer.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Gamerguymass posted...

DK9292 posted...

NeonOctopus posted...

So uh, where is the pic? >_>

Follow the link.

Any links that aren't Yahoo? Yahoo won't even let you use their website anymore unless you basically give them full access to all your personal data and everything on your computer/tablet/phone.

Have you tried it? Its the U.K version
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Yes, its the best one. Idk why you watched them out of order. lmao
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

What kind of dumb ass marketing company doesn't know that bikini pics and hot girls are some of the easiest things to leverage for almost any type of marketing? I'm not saying she needs to be leveraged herself, but to publicly shame a bikini pic in general is idiotic.

Morons got what they deserved.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Garioshi posted...

How the actual fuck did I fuck that up

Your post didnt even make sense. First you say-

Eleven and Twelve honestly made me feel like everything was going wrong.

Then you say

Are Ocean's 11 and 8 worth seeing?

You do know the numbers aren't an actual person, right?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

It's Oceans 13, my guy. Not Elevens thirteen. LMAO
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Bishop9800 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

Bishop9800 posted...

So you cant answer my question, and have to deflect to another subject/question...

typical.....

LMAO. You brought it up. I'm not about to let you just make up slanderous comments about me, without forcing you back them up.

nice deflection........ I dont have to "make up slanderous comments" about you.

But hey, your "hood" is showing

You did though bud. Weird.

You firstly assumed I said that the TC should agree with his coworker.

Fun fact- I did nothing of the sort.

Second, you said I supported racist statements in the past. I didnt. And when I asked you to explain your claims, you back peddled.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

CookieMarvin posted...

KainFourteh posted...

You're overly sensitive and completely ignored the context of the conversation so you could have your pathetic faux outrage moment.

Now people don't bother with you because they don't trust you or feel comfortable enough around you to have any kind of conversation, encase you get upset and report them for having a harmless conversation.

People like you are a poison in the work place. Funny thing is that your co-worker isn't wrong about what she said.

holy fuck close your whole ass account

Cancel culture at its finest.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Bishop9800 posted...

So you cant answer my question, and have to deflect to another subject/question...

typical.....

LMAO. You brought it up. I'm not about to let you just make up slanderous comments about me, without forcing you back them up.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Bishop9800 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

Bishop9800 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Its the cream of the crop shitposters that are defending your coworker

You did the right thing. That shouldnt be tolerated

Yeah, I noticed that the only people in here defending her are either;

A. Known shit-posters.
B. Accounts I've literally never seen post here before (IE: Shit-posting alts.)

TC did nothing wrong.

In other words, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a shitposter. Must be nice to live in your little world.

So you're saying that TC should have just ignore the racist comments, and agreed with it?

typical coming from you

I dont think I said anything like that. Not even close.

Making up shit about someone, typical coming from you

You have been know to defend racist shit.

Name 1. Be specific. We'll wait.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Bishop9800 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Its the cream of the crop shitposters that are defending your coworker

You did the right thing. That shouldnt be tolerated

Yeah, I noticed that the only people in here defending her are either;

A. Known shit-posters.
B. Accounts I've literally never seen post here before (IE: Shit-posting alts.)

TC did nothing wrong.

In other words, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a shitposter. Must be nice to live in your little world.

So you're saying that TC should have just ignore the racist comments, and agreed with it?

typical coming from you

I dont think I said anything like that. Not even close.

Making up shit about someone, typical coming from you
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Inferno Dive Dragoon posted...

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Its the cream of the crop shitposters that are defending your coworker

You did the right thing. That shouldnt be tolerated

Yeah, I noticed that the only people in here defending her are either;

A. Known shit-posters.
B. Accounts I've literally never seen post here before (IE: Shit-posting alts.)

TC did nothing wrong.

In other words, anyone who doesn't agree with you is a shitposter. Must be nice to live in your little world.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Solar_Crimson posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Its the cream of the crop shitposters that are defending your coworker

You did the right thing. That shouldnt be tolerated

Thankfully your opinion isnt fact

That's not an opinion.

Every single one of his sentences was an opinion. Get over yourself.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Ruvan22 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

Not really, if you're sending aid to someone you need to make sure the country and its leaders aren't corrupt. Small delays shouldn't be suspicious.

You did this in the other topic too.

You pick out 1 thing, ignoring everything else and then go "Well this one thing isn't illegal/suspicious" or "This 1 thing is hearsay (most things are hearsay)"

And it's bizarre.

In this case it's not even true. Both the funds being frozen without reason and the funds suddenly being delayed the moment they were unfrozen are suspicious as fuck by themselves.

They are not reflected in the US relations with any other nation. There are plenty of nations the US sends aid too that are unquestionably corrupt. Such as Saudi Arabia for example.

And the president never gave reason for why the funds were frozen or delayed in the first place, while overruling the other 2 branches of government to do so.

That's suspicious before the Rudy/Barr/Phone Call/Whistleblower shit.

For one, I'm not picking 1 thing and ignoring the rest. Not sure why you'd just make up a blatant lie. And there is reason to delay the funds. Trump already explained it. He was investigating corruption and making sure the country isnt supporting Russia. You simply don't like that answer.

But you are? You don't respond to the rest of his points?
Also, where did Trump say "I'm delaying it to make Ukraine isn't supporting Russia"?

I responded to his points in the other topic, and I responded to his points in this topic.

there is another possible explanation for the temporary suspension of aid. At the time, Ukraine was transitioning to a new, democratically-elected government and a review of the aid may have been justified under such circumstances.

https://www.apnews.com/94fdeaddc6b34c02b97278674b87541e

President Trump on Wednesday linked his decision to delay U.S. military aid to Ukraine to concerns about high levels of corruption in that country, and especially to frustration that the Europeans werent doing more to assist their neighbor, which serves as a bulwark between Europe and Russia

https://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/trump-says-he-held-ukraine-aid-over-concerns-about-corruption.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

DezDroppedFreak posted...

Its the cream of the crop shitposters that are defending your coworker

You did the right thing. That shouldnt be tolerated

Thankfully your opinion isnt fact
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UnfairRepresent posted...

This is called the MLAT. Mutual legal assistance treaty. The US representative would talk to the Ukraine representative to show their evidence and get Ukraine to investigate it if warranted.

Incorrect. Jesse Watters said it perfectly.

I have found, from 1999 to 2000, a treaty with Ukraine signed by Bill Clinton on mutual legal assistance and criminal matters, which basically establishes a range of cooperation between the two governments of Ukraine and the United States about making testimony available, making people available, making documents and records available and assisting in the cooperation of mutual criminal matters, Watters said before making the point that if Biden is somehow immune, anyone could be immune by simply saying they are running for office.

Under that then to your point about the Obama team and Hillary Clinton team under that same treaty asking for Ukraine help to investigate Donald Trump would fit underneath the same treaty, co-host Dana Perino asked. (RELATED: Chris Murphy On Ukraine Visit: Zelensky Did Not Make Any Connection Between Aid And Investigation Requests)

Right, so if that is an investigation that is a counterintelligence investigation, that does not fall under criminal investigation, because thats what that was under Barack Obama, Watters explained. And, remember, there were no basis for those inquiries, either. If you are going to say that thats okay, then what Trump did is okay, too.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/09/26/jesse-watters-juan-williams-treaty-ukraine/
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

The US president going to the Ukraine President and extorting him to do so with a personal lawyer who isn't even part of the government as a go-between, is absolutely illegal and idiotic.

Good thing there isnt any proof of this.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UnfairRepresent posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

Not really, if you're sending aid to someone you need to make sure the country and its leaders aren't corrupt. Small delays shouldn't be suspicious.

You did this in the other topic too.

You pick out 1 thing, ignoring everything else and then go "Well this one thing isn't illegal/suspicious" or "This 1 thing is hearsay (most things are hearsay)"

And it's bizarre.

In this case it's not even true. Both the funds being frozen without reason and the funds suddenly being delayed the moment they were unfrozen are suspicious as fuck by themselves.

They are not reflected in the US relations with any other nation. There are plenty of nations the US sends aid too that are unquestionably corrupt. Such as Saudi Arabia for example.

And the president never gave reason for why the funds were frozen or delayed in the first place, while overruling the other 2 branches of government to do so.

That's suspicious before the Rudy/Barr/Phone Call/Whistleblower shit.

For one, I'm not picking 1 thing and ignoring the rest. Not sure why you'd just make up a blatant lie. And there is reason to delay the funds. Trump already explained it. He was investigating corruption and making sure the country isnt supporting Russia. You simply don't like that answer.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UnfairRepresent posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

UnfairRepresent posted...

Smart by Ukraine.

They need to play ball to get that 500 mil that Trump froze.

Even if the impeachment goes through it won't effect Trump's presidency so the extortion is still powerful

Didnt that money already get released?

In theory. But then it was "Delayed" without knowing how much would make it to Ukraine by the end of 2019 until Ukraine commited into digging dirt on Trump's rivals, now they have suddenly the amount is expected to be 90%

Funny thing that.Like 678 bizzare unexplained coincidences in a row... It's almost like it's being orchestrated

Not really, if you're sending aid to someone you need to make sure the country and its leaders aren't corrupt. Small delays shouldn't be suspicious.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UnfairRepresent posted...

Smart by Ukraine.

They need to play ball to get that 500 mil that Trump froze.

Even if the impeachment goes through it won't effect Trump's presidency so the extortion is still powerful

Didnt that money already get released?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Hopefully its 4 hours long with a sequel that comes out 2 weeks later.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Ukraines top legal official said Friday that his office would review a probe into the owner of a natural-gas company linked to former Vice President Joe Bidens son.

Ruslan Ryaboshapka, Ukraines general prosecutor, said during a press conference that the review is part of a wider audit of at least 15 high-profile past investigations that were closed or dismissed by his predecessors.

The announcement Friday comes as an impeachment inquiry over President Donald Trump's dealings with Ukraine consumes Washington. But Ryaboshapka said the decision to review the cases was not specifically related to the time Hunter Biden spent on the board of Burisma, Ukraines largest private natural-gas firm, or allegations from the Trump administration that Joe Biden improperly applied pressure on Ukraine to have an investigation into Burisma halted.

The allegations from Trump and his lawyer Rudolph Giuliani have played a key role in the impeachment inquiry into Trump by Democratic lawmakers.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2019/10/04/ukraine-official-review-probe-tied-joe-bidens-son-hunter/3862796002/
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Forgettable posted...

You did the right thing. All humans are equal in every aspect. It was completely wrong of her to say otherwise.

uhhhh
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

BeantownHero posted...

IdiotMachine posted...

I'll try to be as sensitive as possible: We were talking about sports, and she said that certain races are just naturally good at them because of how they were bred for those traits "back then".

Yeah...that's definitely a suspendable offense

Are you being serious, or facetious? Serious question.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Its basally what the mods do on a daily basis
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

shockthemonkey posted...

Repeating White House talking points that have been refuted is shitposting

Not only did I not do that, your definition of shitposting isn't even in the same hemisphere to what shitposting actually is.

But keep backpeddling, its fun to see.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

shockthemonkey posted...

Bishop9800 posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

UR I appreciate your willingness to have an honest dialogue. I will respond to your post in a few hours.

You need a few hours to respond?

Whatever. We all know you won't.

Its all part of the sea lion act.

Ah yes, reasonable evidence that I will surely consider before future posting.
*immediately shitposts again*

You were saying?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UnfairRepresent posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

What complaint and what transcripts? What are these other calls of treasonous behavior, and who has heard them? I've read the transcripts to the call to the Ukrainian President, and I didn't see any sort of illegal or nefarious activity anywhere in them.A random "whistleblower" saying things, isnt proof He needs to back it with hard evidence

But... His/her claims have been backed with hard evidence O_o

The transcript of the call backs what the Whistleblower said and Rudy Giuliani has backed up a lot of other shit too.

Really the only thing that hasn't been coroberated is there is a lot of "People in the Administration/intelligence commity keep being told to do to dumb/illegal things." and that's the small fry.

Also keep in mind the full whistleblower complaint has not been released, only part of it and that's the part which deals with the Ukraine phone call.

Giuliani has admitted publically that he asked Ukraine to look into digging up dirt on Joe Biden and his son for months. Between May and August. This was before and then after Trump froze the military aid.

Trump also freezing the military aid is not in dispute. And he has never expressed a valid reason for doing so. Which is a big deal you ignore.

This is a big problem because Giuliani is not part of the US government so he should not be involved in foreign policy and this investigation did not go through the correct channels. It's shady illegal shit before you even get to the phone call.

If Ukraine possesses evidence or can obtain evidence that Biden used tax money that benefited his family, then the President has every right to investigate.

Second, it's not illegal for Giuliani to talk with Ukrainian officials. You said:

it's shady illegal s***

What statute is that exactly?

We also have Kurt Volker (Ambassador) saying that there was not a deal made about Biden while Giuilani was there -

The former US envoy to Ukraine told lawmakers during his closed-door testimony Thursday how Rudy Giuliani, President Trumps personal attorney, pressed for a probe into the Ukrainian gas company that hired Joe Bidens son but knew of no quid pro quo, according to a copy of his statement.

As you will see from the extensive text messages I am providing, which convey a sense of real-time dialogue with several different actors, Vice President Biden was never a topic of discussion, Volker told the lawmakers.

You keep bringing up the military aid funds, here is the Ukranian presidents own words on it-

It is impossible to put pressure on me, he told reporters Tuesday. Many people try to influence me, he said, but I am the president of independent Ukraine.

Also-

One senior administration official said Monday that Trumps decision to hold back the funds was based on his concerns about there being a lot of corruption in Ukraine

Why is that not a valid reason? Because it doesn't fit your narrative?
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UR I appreciate your willingness to have an honest dialogue. I will respond to your post in a few hours.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

ChrisTaka posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

ChrisTaka posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

ChrisTaka posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

What complaint and what transcripts?

Big oof

I'm asking for specifics. Try to keep up. I have transcripts right in front of me with the President and the Ukrainian President. Literally nothing out of the ordinary.

Oh believe me, I'm keeping up with all of this lol

You're free to provide the exact specifics in whatever transcript you want, that shows Trump selling secrets, illegal collaboration, etc.

We'll wait.

Unfair pretty much said everything already

LMAO, we all know you weren't gonna post ANYTHING anyways.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

ChrisTaka posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

ChrisTaka posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

What complaint and what transcripts?

Big oof

I'm asking for specifics. Try to keep up. I have transcripts right in front of me with the President and the Ukrainian President. Literally nothing out of the ordinary.

Oh believe me, I'm keeping up with all of this lol

You're free to provide the exact specifics in whatever transcript you want, that shows Trump selling secrets, illegal collaboration, etc.

We'll wait.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

It's not that hard to understand TC. Its cheaper. People want to support farms, and picking fruit is something many don't have the chance to do. They are paying for the fruit, not to pick it. Picking the fruit, is simply part of the experience, which can be an enjoyable process if you're doing it with friends and family.

If you have any other questions, just PM me. I got yu.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

ChrisTaka posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

What complaint and what transcripts?

Big oof

I'm asking for specifics. Try to keep up. I have transcripts right in front of me with the President and the Ukrainian President. Literally nothing out of the ordinary.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

Hairistotle posted...

meralonne posted...

Actually, Im just checking his material so that I can gauge how good/bad he is. So far, just meh... but at least he doesnt break character.

no, youre feeding him, giving him a platform, and contributing to the derailment of yet another topic.

Imagine thinking that I'm the problem here. I've been on topic from the start, until I was attacked. Sorry, but not agreeing with your viewpoints isnt against the rules.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"

UnfairRepresent posted...

karlpilkington4 posted...

1) Is the president allowed to hold money?

In the same sense you're allowed to hold a gun.

But intentionally ignoring all context to ignore the crime is insanity

Epstein is allowed to be in a room with children.

It's the rape that is the problem

2) If he did, is it proven that he did it to bribe Ukraine? If so, where is this evidence? I'm not looking for conjecture, but actual proof.

In a colloquial sense the complaint and transcripts of this and several other phone calls are proof.

In a legal sense there will be no 'proof' until he us impeached or arrested after a trial. As such all evidence of any case ever is hearsay and conjecture before a trial.

So it's a silly question

What complaint and what transcripts? What are these other calls of treasonous behavior, and who has heard them? I've read the transcripts to the call to the Ukrainian President, and I didn't see any sort of illegal or nefarious activity anywhere in them. So can you point out specifics in these or other transcripts? A random "whistleblower" saying things, isnt proof in and of itself. He needs to back it with hard evidence

There is proof in many different criminal cases, before it goes to court. If a guy robs a store, there is evidence of him on camera. If someone attacks someone, there is DNA evidence, or witnesses. All of this evidence is shown either on the news or in reports. It's not a silly question at all.
---

Is This The Krusty Krab? "No This Is Patrick!"