Firstly, because it wasn’t “asking” - it was a populist performance for the benefit of supporters. The unprecedented sanctions against Russia you are witnessing now are result of appropriate diplomacy that was conducted skillfully and effectively. Just to point out the difference.
Secondly, Bill Barr has gone on record to claim that it was a pretext of pulling out of NATO entirely if Trump was going to win a second term. You don’t believe Bill Barr, fine, but I don’t see why he is any less believable than Trump.
Thirdly, I’ve stated a dozen of things that point to Trumps capacity to inflict damage to international coalition that allows US to wield influence, including withholding military aid to Ukraine to pressure them to implicate Biden for political gain, the same Ukraine that figures in the latest events in case you didn’t notice. However the poster did not bother addressing any of that - why should I treat their response with any more rigor than they afforded me?
I’ve made it pretty clear that not only do I “not like the guy”, but I think he is unfit to lead US, has tremendous character flaws, reflects poorly on the nation as a whole, and is detrimental to US standing in the world. Some of it, if it wasn’t obvious before as a somewhat known celebrity host and a prolific racist-ish and misogynistic tweet author, became incredibly clear during his shit-show of a presidency.
“That’s just, like, my opinion, man.” But if the events of January 6th (among countless other incidents, tweets, things said and done, then and since) have not made the truth of my assertions abundantly clear to you - I doubt that any amount of requested “proof” I could produce will.
If it at all redeems me as a “leftist” I’ll share with you that I am not overly fond of Obama either, but I’ll take any past Republican contender, be that Romney or McCain and give them two terms each if that meant that I paid my dues not to see anything like Trump near the White House ever again.
We don’t usually coin a new pseudo-medical term for your run-of-the-mill sociopath. Can you name any other one?
I guess you have to bigly take it to new heights.
To me - a leader’s character matters. But it has become obvious to me that it isn’t as common a trait as I would have expected. Coincidentally, curious - where do you stand on Putin?
> We don’t usually coin a new pseudo-medical term for your run-of-the-mill sociopath. Can you name any other one?
It was first coined as Bush Derangement Syndrome and was also used to describe the rabid irrational hatered that opponents of Obama displayed. If you want to pretend that this is something new, you do you.
> Coincidentally, curious - where do you stand on Putin?
I don't think Trump is as evil as you do, so I probably support Putin? Get a hold of yourself.
Secondly, Bill Barr has gone on record to claim that it was a pretext of pulling out of NATO entirely if Trump was going to win a second term. You don’t believe Bill Barr, fine, but I don’t see why he is any less believable than Trump.
Thirdly, I’ve stated a dozen of things that point to Trumps capacity to inflict damage to international coalition that allows US to wield influence, including withholding military aid to Ukraine to pressure them to implicate Biden for political gain, the same Ukraine that figures in the latest events in case you didn’t notice. However the poster did not bother addressing any of that - why should I treat their response with any more rigor than they afforded me?